Goal: Increased Modularity?

[Les Mikesell]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

>>> I want to know the correct JAVA_HOME and PATH settings for all the 
>>> possible JVMs when they are installed as alternatives-conforming RPM 
>>> packages but are not the system default.  Is this documented somewhere?
>> It seems the current convention is to put the JAVA packages
>> under /usr/lib/jvm/(java|jre)-<majversion>-<vendor>-<majminversion> with
>> certain packages going to /usr/lib/jvm-exports/
>> and /usr/lib/jvm-private/
>>
>> Who's convention is this, anyway?
> 
> Originally, mine when I was active @jpp and was packaging jvms 
> 
>>  And what's it called?
> 
> You know, you're the first person to ask this question I know of:)
> 
> The layout and its intent is described in the jpackage-1.5-policy
> document shipped with jpackage utils. IIRC I wrote this file a week
> after baking the layout and the associated shell scripts, so that would
> date its definition around March 10, 2003.
> 
> I never thought of giving it a name. Today that would be JPackage
> conventions for most people.

So, where do I find the answer to the question above regarding the 
correct JAVA_HOME and PATH to use a JVM that is not the system default?
How is the split exports/private directory supposed to relate to that?

>> It seems Fedora
>> and jpackage both honor this convention (and alternatives uses it. Or
>> maybe it's the other way around ... this convention uses was designed
>> around alternatives).
> 
> Fedora Java packaging as it's known today is a JPackage fork
> (periodically rebased). The Red Hat Java group originally started from
> its own package repository IIRC, but struggled to package the Java world
> and decided later to use a JPackage base as its repo was more complete.

And what's the current situation with this now that Fedora and RHEL5 
include some stuff that looks jpackage'd but isn't?   How do you 
control, for example, which tomcat version you install?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com