Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 16:31:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: Etienne Robillard <erob@videotron.ca> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/63427: [lang/gcc33] Disabling the Java frontend at compile time Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0404221626500.23591@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <40798C91.1040708@videotron.ca> References: <200402271110.i1RBArT5061902@freefall.freebsd.org> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0403061129260.40503@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0403240305510.96995@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <20040324022723.GA4544@moo.holy.cow> <40798C91.1040708@videotron.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Etienne Robillard wrote: > Done :) see below. I had a look at this patch, and as far as I understand it, building Java should be the default (not disabling it). > Ain't that GUI Options screen cool ? :-) :-) > -bin/%%GNU_HOST%%-gcj33 > +%%LIBJAVA%%bin/%%GNU_HOST%%-gcj33 This doesn't seem right: one might want to just disable building libgcj, and still build the Java frontend. In fact, does it really much sense to disable building the frontend, now that we have support for disabling libgcj? The frontend is comparatively light, adding such an option will add complexity to the port and an hardly tested path (combinatorial explosion). > There's still some minimal glitches about info files, namely gcj and > fastjar. I'm sure this is not a problem. One more thing, I didn't had > time to test _with_ (default settings) the JAVA knob. So maybe this is > still early, since Gerald wanted to clear out bugs before adding stuff. Yes. :-) And I think the point you are making is a very good one: will this really be tested on a regular base, if we add such an option? Gerald -- Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.58.0404221626500.23591>