Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:35:33 -0400 From: Mikhail Teterin <Mikhail.Teterin@murex.com> To: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> Cc: java@freebsd.org, hq@freebsd.org Subject: Re: some questions about Java ports Message-ID: <200510031435.33964.Mikhail.Teterin@murex.com> In-Reply-To: <20051003181505.GA54035@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <200510030230.j932Uwbo005425@blue.virtual-estates.net> <200510031236.32784.Mikhail.Teterin@murex.com> <20051003181505.GA54035@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I think that would be incorrect. JDK 1.5 is unlikely to be the first > target of a port except for maybe sparc64 (and I know that the CVS version > of 1.3 already partially supports sparc64, so even that is unlikely). Alright, so it has to be more complex, than I thought, but evidently it has to take the ARCH into account as each JDK has platforms, where it does not build. > Now there are other selection criteria (native or not, vendor), so it > doesn't make sense to arbitrarily pick one selection criterion (version) and > mix it with the simple yes/no of whether the port uses Java or not. Why not continue mixing it? The yes/no is, literally, a one-bit value, but many bytes are used to store it. > Despite that, the old way of doing things does work, you'll just get hate > mail from Herve and I if you commit a new port that uses it ;-). I'll look forward to that. Thanks... -mi P.S. Can you, please, look into the JAVA_HOME not being appended to MAKE_ENV properly? Thanks!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200510031435.33964.Mikhail.Teterin>