Re: Question regarding jpp6 and jpp5

hrm, the SRPM issue should have been fixed... Checking the last 6.0
package I see fly by on the jpackage server shows:

[jasonc@ryu ~]$ rpm -qp --qf '%{N} %{RPMVERSION}\n' ~jpackage/dist
/6.0/generic/free/RPMS/ant-1.8.0-4.jpp6.noarch.rpm
ant 4.4.2.3

A 4.4.2.3 built RPM should rebuild without issue on RHEL5. Are there
specific packages that you see that need a rebuild?
Jason

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2010/3/16 Marcin Rzeźnicki <[email protected]>:
>> Hi all,
>> After installing jpp6 release package on my Fedora-box I noticed that
>> sometimes more recent versions of libraries can be found in jpp5
>> repository. So I thought that i should add jpp5 along jpp6 to have
>> access to all libraries I care for. Unfortunately, jpp6 updates jpp5,
>> so generally yum didn't think well of my idea. So I started to search
>> for hints through jpackage website to find what's the deal with jpp5/6
>> (apart from different java targets) and found none. Hence my question
>> here. What is the relation between jpp6 and jpp5 with regard to
>> libraries patches updates etc. ? Thank you very much in advance.
>
> One thing I've noticed is that for recent Fedora, a lot of JPP6 is
> unneeded. For example, the Sun JDK's  became unnecessary when Fedora
> started including openjdk of a recent enough version. And JPP6 is
> painful in the extreme to backport to RHEL, even for RHEL 5. Even the
> SRPM's are incompatible due to the changes in RPM formats.
> _______________________________________________
> JPackage-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss