1 |
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 19:16:22 +1100 |
2 |
Andrew Cowie <andrew@×××××××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 10:45 -0500, Joshua Nichols wrote: |
5 |
> > I'm not fond of the name gcj-jdk. The ebuild Andrew made was just for |
6 |
> > gcj itself, without the Java compatibility stuff, iirc. -jdk suggests |
7 |
> > that it provides a usable JDK, which it doesn't as it was. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> ... but was hoping to get there some day. |
10 |
|
11 |
Some news of my overlay |
12 |
|
13 |
I added |
14 |
* shell wrapper scripts for java{,c,doc} to reflect gij / ecj / gjdoc |
15 |
* symlinks to jar, javah, rmic (from fastjar, gcjh, grmic) |
16 |
* java-config-2 integration with java-config-1 compat |
17 |
* PDEPEND on eclipse-ecj and gjdoc |
18 |
|
19 |
to provide a usable JDK with dev-java/gcj |
20 |
|
21 |
I also added a Ecj Compiler Adapter and GnuRmic Rmic Adapter |
22 |
to ant-{core,tasks} which need review. They seem to work. |
23 |
It is simple code. |
24 |
|
25 |
Azureus, Beanshell, eclipse-sdk, Xalan and dependencies merged |
26 |
without issues. OpenOffice.org will need some tweaking for gcj / ecj. |
27 |
Luckily there is a hack from Arklinux to base the work on. |
28 |
|
29 |
My todo |
30 |
high priority |
31 |
* fix issues that pop up (OOo, ...) |
32 |
* wait for java-config-2 to get into Portage |
33 |
|
34 |
medium priority |
35 |
* integrate jar to native |
36 |
|
37 |
low priority |
38 |
* eclipse-sdk to native |
39 |
|
40 |
--- |
41 |
I really dislike that java-gcj-compat. |
42 |
Why? I used it. It is extra work you just do not want. |
43 |
|
44 |
I just do not want to see it in Gentoo! ;) |
45 |
--- |
46 |
|
47 |
> > Speaking of which, I think the added compatibility layer (for javac, |
48 |
> > java, etc) should be a separate package. I'm not sure if this was your |
49 |
> > intention or not. Either way, it would make sense, since you would most |
50 |
> > likely be able to use the same layer for different versions of gcj. |
51 |
> |
52 |
> You guys are the devs, so packag{ing,e name} decisions are yours to make |
53 |
> as you see fit. |
54 |
|
55 |
Would be a cut and paste from dev-java/gcj then. |
56 |
|
57 |
> While I prefer the latter name, I am very sensitive to the issue that |
58 |
> once we call it a jdk (or rather, once java-config allows it to be |
59 |
> selected) we're in for a nightmare of people's expectations not matching |
60 |
> what is actually there... |
61 |
> |
62 |
> [shit like "why isn't it magically creating a binary for me? I thought |
63 |
> GCJ created binaries! Bastards, rant rant rant] |
64 |
|
65 |
That would be the database / jar to native // java to native work as planned. |
66 |
I use 'native (nativeonly)' useflag for eclipse-ecj and gjdoc already. |
67 |
|
68 |
> ... which we'll probably get either way, especially as people |
69 |
> misunderstand the { dev-java/gnu-classpath version vs gcj's imported |
70 |
> version of classpath } issue and the { what Free Java is capable of |
71 |
> these days } issue and the { gcj -C plus gij as JDK vs gcj -c plus gcj |
72 |
> (link) as native compiler } issue. |
73 |
|
74 |
True. |
75 |
|
76 |
We got java{,c}, et cetera, for standard JDK behaviour. |
77 |
I add 'native' useflag to get native code. |
78 |
|
79 |
There will be issues, for sure. |
80 |
|
81 |
> Lots of misunderstanding! Oh well. Doesn't mean we shouldn't carry on |
82 |
> and leverage what the Red Hat boys are up to. |
83 |
|
84 |
I set one way to go. |
85 |
It just needs to be accepted or tweaked to your liking. ;) |
86 |
Finally, one needs to write the code. |
87 |
* which is me |
88 |
* ... and maybe some Java programmer that got some |
89 |
extra spare time to waste |
90 |
|
91 |
|
92 |
Regards, |
93 |
Hanno |
94 |
-- |
95 |
gentoo-java@g.o mailing list |