Bug 341625 – Wrong keywords in dev-java/apple-jdk-bin-1.6.0

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-18 12:19:13 UTC]

dev-java/apple-jdk-bin-1.6.0 contains keywords ppc-macos, x86-macos, and x64-macos, but JDK 6 from Apple is available only for x86_64. apple-jdk-bin-1.5.0 should be used instead where possible, but incorrect ebuild prevents it.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Try to emerge something depending on JDK (ecj in my case)
2.See virtual apple-jdk-bin-1.6.0 installed but not working on anything other x86_64

[Comment 1 Fabian Groffen 2010-10-22 10:48:23 UTC]

hmm, are you sure it's not even for x86-macos?

[Comment 2 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 10:57:25 UTC]

I cannot test it because I'm on PPC, but Apple states it will not work
"Java SE 6 is available on 64-bit Intel-based Macs only." (http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4296)

[Comment 3 Fabian Groffen 2010-10-22 10:59:35 UTC]

I just checked the binaries, and indeed.  I think it won't matter for 32/64 bits (Java is agnostic to it anyway), but for ppc indeed no Java 6.

I just dropped the keywords accordingly.  I'm not sure about replacements, I'm affraid there aren't any.

Thanks for the headsup.

[Comment 4 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:02:14 UTC]

>Java is agnostic to it anyway

I'm afraid JVM is built as x86_64 executables. It also may contain Apple's own assembly

[Comment 5 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:06:48 UTC]

As for replacements, there is soylatte in portage. Also, there is JamVM (but it's steel being ported from GNU classpath to OpenJDK classpath); it's missing in portage. I have not checked if something of this will run e.g. latest NetBeans yet

[Comment 6 Fabian Groffen 2010-10-22 11:11:38 UTC]

hmmm, yeah, but the soylatte ebuild was experimental, and never updated.

Do you have a personal interest in getting it running?

[Comment 7 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:14:59 UTC]

(In reply to comment #6)
> hmmm, yeah, but the soylatte ebuild was experimental, and never updated.
> 
> Do you have a personal interest in getting it running?
> 

Yes. But I think JamVM will run faster because it's optimized for ppc (GNU classpath is a problem though)

[Comment 8 Fabian Groffen 2010-10-22 11:18:24 UTC]

ok, that looks interesting, though we'd need to get gnu classpath in there somehow.

[Comment 9 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:19:04 UTC]

(In reply to comment #8)
> ok, that looks interesting, though we'd need to get gnu classpath in there
> somehow.
> 

I've emerged it already (have not used yet)

[Comment 10 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:22:25 UTC]

When I've written that "GNU classpath is a problem" I've meant it may fail to run NetBeans (JamVM itself also may fail, but author is available)

[Comment 11 Fabian Groffen 2010-10-22 11:25:45 UTC]

ok, do you have ebuilds ready that we could include in the tree?

[Comment 12 Konstantin Tokarev 2010-10-22 11:41:44 UTC]

Not yet