On 2024-04-16, Julien Lepiller wrote:
> Currently, most java packages use the implicit jdk from the build
> system (ant- or maven-build-system), which is… icedtea@8. We still
> have quite a lot of old packages that don't build with openjdk9, so
> I'm not sure when we can update the default jdk…

But for the packages that explicitly need to pull in openjdk:

  git grep 'openjdk[1-9]' | grep -v define-public | grep -v java.scm | nl
     1  gnu/packages/android.scm:    (native-inputs (list openjdk12))
     2  gnu/packages/apl.scm:    (inputs (list bash-minimal openjdk18))
     3  gnu/packages/apl.scm:    (native-inputs (list `(,openjdk18 "jdk") zip))
     4  gnu/packages/axoloti.scm:     `(("openjdk" ,openjdk11 "jdk")
     5  gnu/packages/bioconductor.scm:     (list (list openjdk11 "jdk")
     6  gnu/packages/bioinformatics.scm:       #:jdk openjdk11))
     7  gnu/packages/cran.scm:       ("jdk" ,openjdk11 "jdk")
     8  gnu/packages/diffoscope.scm:         (list `(,openjdk12 "jdk")
     9  gnu/packages/emacs-xyz.scm:       (list emacs-ecukes emacs-espuds emacs-undercover openjdk9))
    10  gnu/packages/geo.scm:           openjdk11))
    11  gnu/packages/geo.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk11
    12  gnu/packages/groovy.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    13  gnu/packages/groovy.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    14  gnu/packages/groovy.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    15  gnu/packages/groovy.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    16  gnu/packages/groovy.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    17  gnu/packages/gstreamer.scm:       ("openjdk" ,openjdk14)
    18  gnu/packages/gstreamer.scm:       ("openjdk:jdk" ,openjdk14 "jdk")
    19  gnu/packages/java-compression.scm:       #:jdk ,openjdk9
    20  gnu/packages/kodi.scm:           openjdk9                     ;like groovy
    21  gnu/packages/mpi.scm:     `(("jdk" ,openjdk11 "jdk")
    22  gnu/packages/pep.scm:           `(,openjdk9 "jdk") which yml2))


It is not a crazy number of packages, but in cases like diffoscope and
enjarify, which seem fairly compatible with arbitrary versions, it would
be nice to have an unversioned option to specify?

Maybe I confused things by talking about the "default" version, I guess
I was wondering if it would make sense for an "openjdk-latest" or
"openjdk-lts" or whatever color you want, just as long as it does not
require specifying (and more importantly, keeping track of) the version
of openjdk needed.

live well,
  vagrant