Does anyone know why the headless openjdk now requires gtk2? Changelogs say "see RHBZ 1598152" but that bug is private. It looks like the change was intended to affect the "headful" package and not the headless one...
Curiosity has the better of me.
W dniu 16.03.2019 o 19:17, Gordon Messmer pisze:
Does anyone know why the headless openjdk now requires gtk2? Changelogs say "see RHBZ 1598152" but that bug is private.
It was because of some class requiring GTK2.
It looks like the change was intended to affect the "headful" package and not the headless one...
Exactly.
On 3/19/19 4:00 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
W dniu 16.03.2019 o 19:17, Gordon Messmer pisze:
Does anyone know why the headless openjdk now requires gtk2? Changelogs say "see RHBZ 1598152" but that bug is private.
It was because of some class requiring GTK2.
A class included in the headless java package required GTK2?
It looks like the change was intended to affect the "headful" package and not the headless one...
Exactly.
Now I'm confused, because you seem to agree that the change should have affected the "headful" package, but the "headless" package now requires GTK2. If the change was intended to affect the "headful" package, then is this change a bug?
W dniu 19.03.2019 o 15:13, Gordon Messmer pisze:
On 3/19/19 4:00 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
W dniu 16.03.2019 o 19:17, Gordon Messmer pisze:
Does anyone know why the headless openjdk now requires gtk2? Changelogs say "see RHBZ 1598152" but that bug is private.
It was because of some class requiring GTK2.
A class included in the headless java package required GTK2?
IIRC both normal and headless share source package. One of classes in normal package requires GTK2.
I am not Java developer.
It looks like the change was intended to affect the "headful" package and not the headless one...
Exactly.
Now I'm confused, because you seem to agree that the change should have affected the "headful" package, but the "headless" package now requires GTK2. If the change was intended to affect the "headful" package, then is this change a bug?
Was intended. Fixed in RHEL7 already.
-
Gordon Messmer -
Marcin Juszkiewicz