Re: [fedora-java] Re: icedtea-plugin rocks!

[Thomas Fitzsimmons]

Jesse Keating wrote:
>  On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:56:05 -0400
>  Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  
> > This was for gcjwebplugin-on-libgcj.  The "icedtea-plugin rocks!"
> > thread is referring to gcjwebplugin-on-IcedTea which is
> > (audit-pending) much more secure. To make gcjwebplugin-on-IcedTea
> > installed and enabled by default as the original poster is proposing,
> > we'd need to have IcedTea available in comps.xml. It's too soon to
> > replace GCJ with IcedTea, because of the architecture coverage
> > issues, but does anyone see a problem with including IcedTea
> > alongside GCJ in the default comps.xml?  That would mean that IcedTea
> > and GCJ would be installed by default, and IcedTea would take
> > precedence on architectures where it was available, and GCJ would be
> > the fallback, selectable using alternatives. Then the IcedTea plugin
> > would be installed by default on architectures where it is
> > available.  I like this approach because there is demand for IcedTea
> > to be included by default.
>  
>  I thought this is what was going to be done anyway, that's the Feature
>  configuration I voted for. 
I didn't think IcedTea was suitable for inclusion in comps because I didn't know 
the compose tools failed gracefully on exclusive-arch packages.  OK to commit 
this patch?

Tom