On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:23:53AM +0100, Samuel Mehrbrodt wrote:
I don't care much which of the jars contains the actual class files, as
long as we don't break backwards compatibility.
I agree.
But I would support adding an additional "uno.jar" (or "libreoffice.jar"),
which has ridl.jar, unoloader.jar, juh.jar etc on it's classpath.
Yeah.
Especially for distros (like the next Debian) where those libraries are
not hidden but due to the Java policy are actual packages depended on by
ure and libreoffice where needed:
$ dh_listpackages | grep java$
libunoil-java
libofficebean-java
libjuh-java
libridl-java
libunoloader-java
libjurt-java
$
Of course (and that is what I have local right now) I can make
libunoil-java and libjurt-java packages containing those jars as before
and depending on libridl-java but as said, this is mildly confusing.
A new libuno-java with a uno.jar would be cleaner.
Especially given the C++ libraries are named libuno_* (those are also
extra packages in the meanwhile):
$ dh_listpackages | grep libuno
libunoil-java
libuno-sal3
libuno-salhelpergcc3-3
libuno-cppu3
libuno-cppuhelpergcc3-3
libuno-purpenvhelpergcc3-3
libunoloader-java
Regards,
Rene
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.