postgresql-jdbc packaging

Panagiotis Astithas past at ebs.gr
Mon Feb 14 01:15:57 PST 2005


Palle Girgensohn wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm maintaining the postgresql-jdbc port.
> 
> One thing I've considered, but not come to any conclusion about, is 
> whether the port should register somehow which version of JDBC it has 
> built, JDBC1, JDBC2 or JDBC3. There's even a JDBC2 + EE variant... Which 
> version is built depends on which JDK was used to build it. jdk1.1 => 
> JDBC1, jdk1.2-1.3 => JDBC2, and jdk1.4+ => JDBC3. Hence, very few would 
> want JDBC1 nowadays, I suppose. The only package built by the package 
> cluster now is for JDBC1, which kind of sucks a bit :)
> 
> To fix this, the right way is to create a bunch of slave ports, on for 
> each type as per above. Then, the package building cluster would build 
> all version. The slave ports would set JAVA_VERSION=1.1 and 1.2 
> respectively, and the main port could install the greatest version. 
> PKGNAMESUFFIX would be set to jdbcN.
> 
> Is this just overkill? If most of you use the port anyway, it probably 
> is, but if ppl tend to use prebuilt packages, they will end up with a 
> somewhat crippled JDBC1 jar even if they run jdk-1.5, so then it might 
> be worth it.
> 
> I slimmer way is to just let the package name reflect which version has 
> been built, but not bother to create slave ports.
> 
> Any opinions? What do you think, is it worth the effort?
> 
> /Palle
> 
> (See <http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html> for info on different 
> versions of PostgreSQL's JDBC.)

As someone who was bitten by this, I believe package users should have 
some sort of warning sign. I don't mind what the solution will be, as 
long as a regular "pkg_add -r foo" can work as expected. Is this 
possible with the "slimmer" approach?

Cheers,

Panagiotis


More information about the freebsd-java mailing list