[CentOS-devel] rhwas 5 work?

Johnny Hughes johnny at centos.org
Thu Apr 10 16:23:46 UTC 2008

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>>>>> There is something that I don't have clearly understood, why 
>>>>>> couldn't you use icedtea java instead ?
>>>>> Because icedtea is Java 1.7, which isn't really there yet. This one is
>>>>> Java 1.6.
>>>> And even Java 1.6 is a strech, as the webstack is currently built 
>>>> using java-1.4.2 ... which we can not use to build since we can not 
>>>> distribute it.
>>> What's the problem with a jpackage nosrc rpm and instructions to 
>>> download your own copy of the java binary from Sun and execute this 
>>> command?
>> Because CentOS does not distribute RPMS that we can't get repo closure 
>> on.
> By popular demand?  Dictated by some arbitrary policy?

Because I said so :D

>> People expect that if they say yum install jbossas it will work and 
>> NOT require them to build stuff.
> I don't know anyone who currently expects that.  Those expectations were 
> dashed long ago in the fedora/centos world along with any expectations 
> of java being usable at all.  They used to expect to go spend a day 
> reading the jpackage docs to find the right pieces, then grab the Sun 
> package, rebuild the nosrc rpm, then use yum to install the jpackage 
> apps.  But current fedora and Centos 5.x include broken versions of what 
> jpackage used to provide and jpackage doesn't even have documentation on 
> how to use their packages with them even thought the nosrc rpm for sun 
> would probably still work.
>> Also ... I can't build GPL stuff against NON-FREE stuff and distribute 
>> it as GPL :D
> Aggregation isn't a problem.

It isn't aggregation IF it is a derivative work.

>> (Well or at least it is a questionable proactice)
> Nobody questioned it when Sun was the only possible JVM.

Sure it was ... you don't see any of that stuff in Fedora do you?  Or 
Gentoo or Debian.  If it was such a good idea, they all would have had 
it in there several years ago.

>> AND since there is a FREE / GPL version available that is what we will 
>> use or we won't distribute it.
> But what about that expectation of working...

If it doesn't work it doesn't ship ... and we are right back where we 

The bottom line is if you require that, buy a RHWAS and jboss 
subscription ... at least if we can't make a redistributable one work.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20080410/f0aad195/attachment.sig>

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list