Fwd: Re: IcedTea build instructions

[Jiri Vanek]

On 10/06/2011 06:28 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 04:17 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
>> On 10/06/2011 06:07 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> Indeed.  But the question is still not answered.  What shall we tell
>>> people to do?  IMO, check out the latest release, which is
>>> icedtea6-1.10.3, or checkout the latest release branch.  I can see the
>>> arguments for both.  But telling people to checkout -r icedtea6-1.10
>>> is pretty stupid, IMO.
>>>
>>
>> It may also be dangerous if the icedtea6-1.10 release contains known
>> vulnerabilities that are patched in a later release.
>>
>> Given the choice between the latest release or the latest release
>> branch, I am tempted to go with the latter. The latest release branch
>> should only contain bug fixes. Given that the wiki may not be always up
>> to date, it may, for a short while, link folks to an older release after
>> a new release has been announced. I think it would be safer to point
>> people to the latest release branch.
>
> I think so too.  The only problem is that people might end up with a
> bug that no-one else can reproduce.  However, it's where I'd go for
> the most stable IcedTea release.
>
>> FWIW,
>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/ReleasingIcedTea#Post-release_updates
>> says that the person doing the release should update the version on the
>> main wiki - though I am not sure if they are referring to the version on
>> the hg command or something else.
>
> I don't think that matters because what's there right now is obviously
> wrong.
>
> Andrew.

According to this thread, I would like to suggest attached patch to icedtea wiki:

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: qs.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 4447 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20111010/6ba74752/qs.diff