Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: User

license change in sun-jdk

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

rudmer.van.dijk at casema

Nov 9, 2009, 7:57 AM

Post #1 of 7 (677 views)
Permalink

license change in sun-jdk

Hi,

for all who have problems with their jdk (and don't want to spent half an hour
finding out why 8-):

after sync, portage wants to install dev-java/icedtea6-bin, although there is
a jdk installed (I already had dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.17)

well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license masked...

adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be accepted again.
no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!

Rudmer

rdalek1967 at gmail

Nov 9, 2009, 10:00 AM

Post #2 of 7 (672 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for all who have problems with their jdk (and don't want to spent half an hour
> finding out why 8-):
>
> after sync, portage wants to install dev-java/icedtea6-bin, although there is
> a jdk installed (I already had dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.17)
>
> well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license masked...
>
> adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be accepted again.
> no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!
>
>
> Rudmer
>
>

I cheated then. I did this for mine:

ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"

I think that covers them all.

Dale

:-) :-)

rudmer.van.dijk at casema

Nov 9, 2009, 10:14 AM

Post #3 of 7 (660 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

On Monday 09 November 2009, Dale wrote:
> Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
> >
> > well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license
> > masked...
> >
> > adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be accepted
> > again. no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!
> >
>
> I cheated then. I did this for mine:
>
> ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
>
> I think that covers them all.

that will certainly prevent future problems! 8-)

thanks!

Rudmer

kyle.bader at gmail

Nov 9, 2009, 5:24 PM

Post #4 of 7 (660 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

Thanks dale, adding :)

On 11/9/09, Dale <rdalek1967 [at] gmail> wrote:
> Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for all who have problems with their jdk (and don't want to spent half an
>> hour
>> finding out why 8-):
>>
>> after sync, portage wants to install dev-java/icedtea6-bin, although there
>> is
>> a jdk installed (I already had dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.17)
>>
>> well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license
>> masked...
>>
>> adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be accepted
>> again.
>> no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!
>>
>>
>> Rudmer
>>
>>
>
> I cheated then. I did this for mine:
>
> ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
>
> I think that covers them all.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

Kyle

wonko at wonkology

Nov 10, 2009, 5:56 AM

Post #5 of 7 (660 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

Rudmer van Dijk writes:

> On Monday 09 November 2009, Dale wrote:
> > Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
> > > well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license
> > > masked...
> > >
> > > adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be
> > > accepted again. no more spontaneous forced installation of
> > > icedtea6-bin!
> >
> > I cheated then. I did this for mine:
> >
> > ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
> >
> > I think that covers them all.
>
> that will certainly prevent future problems! 8-)

Yeah, but while I probably have no real problem with accepting all those
licenses, at least I like to know what I accept. So I prefer to put this
stuff into package.license, which at this moment looks like this:

games-fps/quake3-bin Q3AEULA
games-fps/quake3-data Q3AEULA
dev-java/sun-jdk dlj-1.1

Alternatively, ACCEPT_LICENSE="Q3AEULA dlj-1.1" in make.conf would also
work.

When a license change happens, I can see that and decide whether I like it
or not.

Wonko

mr.jarry at gmail

Nov 10, 2009, 11:01 AM

Post #6 of 7 (653 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

Dale wrote:
> Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
>>
>> after sync, portage wants to install dev-java/icedtea6-bin, although there is
>> a jdk installed (I already had dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.17)
>> well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license masked...
>> adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be accepted again.
>> no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!
>
> I cheated then. I did this for mine:
> ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"

This is strange: I tried to update, and got list of ~10 packages,
plus that above mentioned error. So I included in ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
in make.conf, and tried it agan. And nothing. Suddenly it portage
does not want to update anything. As if there is nothing to update...

Jarry

--
_______________________________________________________________
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists!
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.

alan.mckinnon at gmail

Nov 10, 2009, 12:35 PM

Post #7 of 7 (653 views)
Permalink

Re: license change in sun-jdk [In reply to]

On Tuesday 10 November 2009 21:01:52 Jarry wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> > Rudmer van Dijk wrote:
> >> after sync, portage wants to install dev-java/icedtea6-bin, although
> >> there is a jdk installed (I already had dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.17)
> >> well it turns out that sun-jdk-1.6.0.17 has suddenly been license
> >> masked... adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" to make.conf lets sun-jdk be
> >> accepted again. no more spontaneous forced installation of icedtea6-bin!
> >
> > I cheated then. I did this for mine:
> > ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
>
> This is strange: I tried to update, and got list of ~10 packages,
> plus that above mentioned error. So I included in ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
> in make.conf, and tried it agan. And nothing. Suddenly it portage
> does not want to update anything. As if there is nothing to update...

Why is it strange? The behaviour is correct

You accepted the license and world is up to date so portage correctly tells
you there is nothing to do.

Without the LICENSE statement in make.conf, you have 10 unacceptable packages.
So portage tells you it will remove them and replace them without something
else, or maybe just display blockers. In any event portage knows there is
something to do.

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads