[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 1/7] openjdk-8-native: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 1/7] openjdk-8-native: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

The OpenJDK8-native recipe provides a Java SDK, and a Java Runtime. It
is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjdk-8. This makes
it possible to:
a) add OpenJDK9 and OpenJDK10 recipes in the future without much disruption
b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java

This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
index 761ddc7..2dd31e7 100644
--- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
+++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
@@ -87,3 +87,6 @@ do_install() {
         ln -sf "../lib/jvm/${JDK_DIR}/bin/$tool" ${D}${bindir}/$tool
     done
 }
+
+PROVIDES = "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
+RPROVIDES_${PN} = "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 2/7] layer.conf: allow multiple Java SDKs & runtimes to co-exist

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

Using MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST, we can instruct Bitbake to not complain
if multiple recipes provide or runtime provide the same Java environment.

This is a common use-case, and Java packages don't conflict with each
other as they are typically installed under a different prefix, while still
providing (more or less) the same features.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 conf/layer.conf | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/conf/layer.conf b/conf/layer.conf
index 3b00f61..8b2978a 100644
--- a/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/conf/layer.conf
@@ -14,3 +14,6 @@ LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/licenses"
 SIGGEN_EXCLUDERECIPES_ABISAFE += "\
     ca-certificates-java \
 "
+
+MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
+MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 3/7] openjdk-8: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

Then OpenJDK8 recipe provides a Java SDK, and a Java Runtime. It
is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjdk-8. This makes
it possible to:
a) add OpenJDK9 and OpenJDK10 recipes in the future without much disruption
b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java

This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
index 9c2a7a1..77c2a57 100644
--- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
+++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
@@ -45,10 +45,10 @@ FILES_${PN}-doc_append = "\
 
 FILES_${PN}-source = " ${JDK_HOME}/src.zip "
 
-RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
-PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
-RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
-PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
+PROVIDES = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
+PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
+RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
+RPROVIDES_${PN} += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
 
 inherit update-alternatives
 
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 4/7] openjre-8: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

Then OpenJRE8 recipe provides a Java Runtime. It
is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjre-8. This makes
it possible to:
a) add OpenJRE9 and OpenJRE10 recipes in the future without much disruption
b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java

This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
index 220dc01..eac5e5e 100644
--- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
+++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
@@ -33,10 +33,10 @@ FILES_${PN}-doc_append = "\
     ${JRE_HOME}/THIRD_PARTY_README \
 "
 
-RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
-PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
-RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
-PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
+PROVIDES = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
+PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
+RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
+RPROVIDES_${PN} += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
 
 inherit update-alternatives
 
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 5/7] layer.conf: set defaults for Java JRE (R)PROVIDERS

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

OpenJRE-8 seems like a good choice.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 conf/layer.conf | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/conf/layer.conf b/conf/layer.conf
index 8b2978a..e965170 100644
--- a/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/conf/layer.conf
@@ -17,3 +17,12 @@ SIGGEN_EXCLUDERECIPES_ABISAFE += "\
 
 MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
 MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
+
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java5-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java6-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java7-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java8-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java5-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java6-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java7-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
+PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java8-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 6/7] openjdk-7: (R)PROVIDE virtual Java [567] packages

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

Similar to OpenJDK-8, OpenJDK-7 is a provider of Java 5 through 7
(including).

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
index 1ac3154..85a34da 100644
--- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
+++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ JDK_DIR = "java-7-openjdk"
 
 PN = "${JDKPN}-jre"
 PROVIDES += "${JDKPN}"
+PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,8))}"
 
 DEPENDS = " \
     icedtea7-native zip-native ant-native \
@@ -283,6 +284,7 @@ FILES_${JDKPN}-jdk = " \
 RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-jre = "${JDKPN}-java ${JDKPN}-common"
 RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-java = "${JDKPN}-common"
 RPROVIDES_${JDKPN}-jre = "java2-runtime"
+RPROVIDES_${JDKPN}-jre += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,8))}"
 
 RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-jdk = "${JDKPN}-jre"
 
-- 
2.18.0

[meta-java][RFC][PATCH 7/7] ca-certificates-java: switch to more generic / more correct JAVA (R)DEPENDS

[André Draszik]

From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>

This recipe here actually depends on Java7 upwards, not Java2 upwards,
so state that dependency correctly using the newly introduced (virtual)
RPROVIDES of the OpenJDK8/OpenJRE8 recipes.

At the same time, we can remove hard-coded references to openjdk-8 and
openjre-8, and thusly make the build more flexible.

Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
---
 .../ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb                   | 10 ++--------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
index a2d7abd..2ae7352 100644
--- a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
+++ b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ DEPENDS = "virtual/javac-native fastjar-native"
 # We can't use virtual/javac-native, because that would create a
 # keystore that can't be read on the target (as virtual/javac-native
 # usually is either too old, or plain incompatible with this)
-PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "openjdk-8-native"
+PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "virtual/java7-runtime-native"
 
 SRC_URI = "\
 	git://salsa.debian.org/java-team/ca-certificates-java.git \
@@ -31,12 +31,6 @@ B = "${WORKDIR}/build"
 
 JARFILENAME = "${BPN}.jar"
 
-python () {
-    runtime = d.getVar("PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_java2-runtime") or ""
-    if not runtime in ("openjdk-8", "openjre-8"):
-        raise bb.parse.SkipRecipe("PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_java2-runtime '%s' unsupported" % runtime)
-}
-
 do_patch_append () {
     bb.build.exec_func('do_fix_sysconfdir', d)
 }
@@ -99,7 +93,7 @@ pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
 }
 
 RDEPENDS_${PN} = "ca-certificates"
-RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_class-target = " java2-runtime"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_class-target = " virtual-java7-runtime"
 
 FILES_${PN} += "${datadir_java}"
 
-- 
2.18.0

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 1/7] openjdk-8-native: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
thanks for the patches!

Some comments from my side:

A cover letter describing the purpose of the whole patchset would be great ;-)

Furthermore IMHO the -runtime-native and -sdk-native providers should be documented/described in the README file.

Otherwise feel free to add
	Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>
for this patch.

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> The OpenJDK8-native recipe provides a Java SDK, and a Java Runtime. It
> is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
> appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
> that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjdk-8. This makes
> it possible to:
> a) add OpenJDK9 and OpenJDK10 recipes in the future without much disruption
> b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java
> 
> This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
> index 761ddc7..2dd31e7 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
> +++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8-native.inc
> @@ -87,3 +87,6 @@ do_install() {
>          ln -sf "../lib/jvm/${JDK_DIR}/bin/$tool" ${D}${bindir}/$tool
>      done
>  }
> +
> +PROVIDES = "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
> +RPROVIDES_${PN} = "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 2/7] layer.conf: allow multiple Java SDKs & runtimes to co-exist

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
again: thank you and feel free to add

Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> Using MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST, we can instruct Bitbake to not complain
> if multiple recipes provide or runtime provide the same Java environment.
> 
> This is a common use-case, and Java packages don't conflict with each
> other as they are typically installed under a different prefix, while still
> providing (more or less) the same features.
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  conf/layer.conf | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/conf/layer.conf b/conf/layer.conf
> index 3b00f61..8b2978a 100644
> --- a/conf/layer.conf
> +++ b/conf/layer.conf
> @@ -14,3 +14,6 @@ LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/licenses"
>  SIGGEN_EXCLUDERECIPES_ABISAFE += "\
>      ca-certificates-java \
>  "
> +
> +MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
> +MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 3/7] openjdk-8: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
again: thank you and feel free to add

Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> Then OpenJDK8 recipe provides a Java SDK, and a Java Runtime. It
> is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
> appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
> that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjdk-8. This makes
> it possible to:
> a) add OpenJDK9 and OpenJDK10 recipes in the future without much disruption
> b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java
> 
> This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
> index 9c2a7a1..77c2a57 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
> +++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-8_172b11.bb
> @@ -45,10 +45,10 @@ FILES_${PN}-doc_append = "\
>  
>  FILES_${PN}-source = " ${JDK_HOME}/src.zip "
>  
> -RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
> -PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
> -RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
> -PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
> +PROVIDES = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
> +PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
> +RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
> +RPROVIDES_${PN} += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
>  
>  inherit update-alternatives
>  
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 4/7] openjre-8: add meaningful (R)PROVIDES

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
again: thank you and feel free to add

Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> Then OpenJRE8 recipe provides a Java Runtime. It
> is compatible with Java versions 5 through 8 (including), so add
> appropriate (R)PROVIDES, so that recipes depending on it can can specify
> that virtual dependency, rather than hard-coding to openjre-8. This makes
> it possible to:
> a) add OpenJRE9 and OpenJRE10 recipes in the future without much disruption
> b) use a different provider than OpenJDK, e.g. Oracle Java, or Zulu Java
> 
> This is the approach taken by e.g. Debian.
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
> index 220dc01..eac5e5e 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
> +++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjre-8_172b11.bb
> @@ -33,10 +33,10 @@ FILES_${PN}-doc_append = "\
>      ${JRE_HOME}/THIRD_PARTY_README \
>  "
>  
> -RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
> -PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm"
> -RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
> -PROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-runtime"
> +PROVIDES = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
> +PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
> +RPROVIDES_${PN} = "java2-vm java2-runtime"
> +RPROVIDES_${PN} += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
>  
>  inherit update-alternatives
>  
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 6/7] openjdk-7: (R)PROVIDE virtual Java [567] packages

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
again: thank you and feel free to add

Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> Similar to OpenJDK-8, OpenJDK-7 is a provider of Java 5 through 7
> (including).
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
> index 1ac3154..85a34da 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
> +++ b/recipes-core/openjdk/openjdk-7-common.inc
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ JDK_DIR = "java-7-openjdk"
>  
>  PN = "${JDKPN}-jre"
>  PROVIDES += "${JDKPN}"
> +PROVIDES += "${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,8))}"
>  
>  DEPENDS = " \
>      icedtea7-native zip-native ant-native \
> @@ -283,6 +284,7 @@ FILES_${JDKPN}-jdk = " \
>  RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-jre = "${JDKPN}-java ${JDKPN}-common"
>  RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-java = "${JDKPN}-common"
>  RPROVIDES_${JDKPN}-jre = "java2-runtime"
> +RPROVIDES_${JDKPN}-jre += "${@' '.join('virtual-java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,8))}"
>  
>  RDEPENDS_${JDKPN}-jdk = "${JDKPN}-jre"
>  
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 7/7] ca-certificates-java: switch to more generic / more correct JAVA (R)DEPENDS

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,
again: thank you and feel free to add

Acked-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>

regards;Richard.L

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> This recipe here actually depends on Java7 upwards, not Java2 upwards,
> so state that dependency correctly using the newly introduced (virtual)
> RPROVIDES of the OpenJDK8/OpenJRE8 recipes.
> 
> At the same time, we can remove hard-coded references to openjdk-8 and
> openjre-8, and thusly make the build more flexible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  .../ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb                   | 10 ++--------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> index a2d7abd..2ae7352 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> +++ b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ DEPENDS = "virtual/javac-native fastjar-native"
>  # We can't use virtual/javac-native, because that would create a
>  # keystore that can't be read on the target (as virtual/javac-native
>  # usually is either too old, or plain incompatible with this)
> -PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "openjdk-8-native"
> +PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "virtual/java7-runtime-native"
>  
>  SRC_URI = "\
>  	git://salsa.debian.org/java-team/ca-certificates-java.git \
> @@ -31,12 +31,6 @@ B = "${WORKDIR}/build"
>  
>  JARFILENAME = "${BPN}.jar"
>  
> -python () {
> -    runtime = d.getVar("PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_java2-runtime") or ""
> -    if not runtime in ("openjdk-8", "openjre-8"):
> -        raise bb.parse.SkipRecipe("PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_java2-runtime '%s' unsupported" % runtime)
> -}
> -
>  do_patch_append () {
>      bb.build.exec_func('do_fix_sysconfdir', d)
>  }
> @@ -99,7 +93,7 @@ pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
>  }
>  
>  RDEPENDS_${PN} = "ca-certificates"
> -RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_class-target = " java2-runtime"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_class-target = " virtual-java7-runtime"
>  
>  FILES_${PN} += "${datadir_java}"
>  
> 

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 5/7] layer.conf: set defaults for Java JRE (R)PROVIDERS

[Richard Leitner]

Hi André,

On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> 
> OpenJRE-8 seems like a good choice.

I'm not sure if OpenJRE-8 is the best choice as it currently doesn't support JIT for
arm architectures...

Maybe openjdk-7-jre would be better here?

Furthermore as already mentioned in PATCH 1 IMHO it would be great to describe/document those PROVIDERs in the README.
This would help newcomers a lot.

> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  conf/layer.conf | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/conf/layer.conf b/conf/layer.conf
> index 8b2978a..e965170 100644
> --- a/conf/layer.conf
> +++ b/conf/layer.conf
> @@ -17,3 +17,12 @@ SIGGEN_EXCLUDERECIPES_ABISAFE += "\
>  
>  MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-sdk-native virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime-native' for x in range(5,9))}"
>  MULTI_PROVIDER_WHITELIST_append = " ${@' '.join('virtual/java'+str(x)+'-runtime' for x in range(5,9))}"
> +
> +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java5-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java6-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java7-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/java8-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java5-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java6-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java7-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> +PREFERRED_RPROVIDER_virtual-java8-runtime ?= "openjre-8"
> 

regards;Richard.L

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 5/7] layer.conf: set defaults for Java JRE (R)PROVIDERS

[André Draszik]

On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 12:49 +0200, Richard Leitner wrote:
> Hi André,
> 
> On 07/27/2018 03:29 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> > From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> > 
> > OpenJRE-8 seems like a good choice.
> 
> I'm not sure if OpenJRE-8 is the best choice as it currently doesn't
> support JIT for
> arm architectures...

Oh, thanks. I didn't realise that...

Anybody know why? Just nobody interested enough so far to integrate the
aarch32 hotspot port into meta-java?


Cheers,
Andre'

Re: [meta-java][RFC][PATCH 7/7] ca-certificates-java: switch to more generic / more correct JAVA (R)DEPENDS

[Kyle Russell]

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 9:29 AM André Draszik <git@andred.net> wrote:

> From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
>
> This recipe here actually depends on Java7 upwards, not Java2 upwards,
> so state that dependency correctly using the newly introduced (virtual)
> RPROVIDES of the OpenJDK8/OpenJRE8 recipes.
>
> At the same time, we can remove hard-coded references to openjdk-8 and
> openjre-8, and thusly make the build more flexible.
>
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@jci.com>
> ---
>  .../ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb                   | 10 ++--------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/
> ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/
> ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> index a2d7abd..2ae7352 100644
> --- a/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> +++ b/recipes-core/ca-certificates-java/ca-certificates-java_20180516.bb
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ DEPENDS = "virtual/javac-native fastjar-native"
>

Should this DEPEND on virtual/java7-sdk-native instead?

 # We can't use virtual/javac-native, because that would create a
>  # keystore that can't be read on the target (as virtual/javac-native
>  # usually is either too old, or plain incompatible with this)
> -PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "openjdk-8-native"
> +PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS += "virtual/java7-runtime-native"
>

Would you still need the PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS if the DEPENDS above was
changed?  I thought virtual/javac-native was "too old" because it was
reserved for the bootstrap process, so I've been considering it as a
special case.