First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 138728
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Java team <java@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Josh Nichols (RETIRED) <nichoj@gentoo.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 138728 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 138728 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2006-07-01 08:48 0000
2.1 is pretty durn old as far as Eclipse goes. I'd like to drop it, in favor of
newer, more stable versions, like 3.0 and later.

The only kink is that it is marked stable on sparc, and there are no later
version with any sort of sparc keyword. I have heard rumblings that java is
masked in general on sparc.

So, is that true, and if so, is it cool to drop 2.1?

------- Comment #1 From Gustavo Zacarias (RETIRED) 2006-07-01 14:20:02 0000 -------
You have our blessing, so be it.

------- Comment #2 From Petteri Räty 2006-07-03 03:52:15 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> 2.1 is pretty durn old as far as Eclipse goes. I'd like to drop it, in favor of
> newer, more stable versions, like 3.0 and later.
> 
> The only kink is that it is marked stable on sparc, and there are no later
> version with any sort of sparc keyword. I have heard rumblings that java is
> masked in general on sparc.
> 

The sparc team has given us the permissions to always remove the old versions
in these kinds of situation so you do not need to ask in the future. Old
versions removed.

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug