Hi again,
I updated the text a bit and added it to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/DraftsTodo
=== Additional changes ===
Some text clarifications.
Declaring Packaging/JPackagePolicy as optional.
Mention/allow use of %{_javadir}-x.x.x dirs.
Mention how %{_jnidir} might be used in the future.
Remove question about sed usage on MANIFEST.MF files.
lör 2010-01-02 klockan 15:47 +0100 skrev Alexander Boström:
Hi,
I submitted a review for java-gnome and working on that made me think
the Java guidelines needs work, so here's a suggested update:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Abo/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate
=== Changes ===
Removed some occurances of a Unicode control character that didn't seem
to belong there.
Fixed formatting of the text under "Jar file naming".
Hopefully clarified the text under "Directory structure".
Changed some occuranced of "<code>%{_xxx</code>}" into
"<code>%{_xxx}</code>".
Changed -javadoc Group tag from "Development Documentation" to
"Documentation".
Mostly rewrote the section on JNI packaging. (See wiki.)
Removed this text:
The <code>%{_jnidir</code>} rpm macro defines the main JNI jar
repository. Like <code>%{_javadir</code>} it is declined in
<code>-ext</code> and <code>-x.y.z</code> variants. It
follows
exactly the same rules as the <code>%{_javadir</code>}-derived
tree structure, except that it hosts JAR files that use JNI.
<code>%{_jnidir</code>} usually expands into
<code>/usr/lib/java</code>.
It seems to belong to the "The plan is to eventually..." part, but I
don't really understand it. Explain and I'll add something back. :)
Partially rewrote the section on prebuilt binaries and the suggested %
prep section. (See wiki.)
/abo
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging