| 1 |
On Tuesday 09 December 2003 09:53, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday 09 December 2003 07:00, Luke-Jr wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Monday 08 December 2003 09:41 pm, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Speaking of the java USE flag, I would suggest that a new java-dev flag |
| 5 |
> > > should still add gcj to gcc. If a java developer doesn't want gcj, |
| 6 |
> > > that's a per-package customization issue that will be fully supported |
| 7 |
> > > in portage-ng (and 2.0.50?) |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Shouldn't gcj be enabled simply by java-user? How else are they going to |
| 10 |
> > emerge/compile a Java pkg? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I haven't installed many java-based packages from source - only one that I |
| 13 |
> can remember. It required virtual/jdk and pulled in blackdown. I figured |
| 14 |
> all others would be the same. If they're not, that is simply another |
| 15 |
> indication of the same problem. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Just did some grepping of the portage tree and couldn't find any others that |
| 18 |
were different. Many packages use virtual/jre instead but they don't compile |
| 19 |
java source files at all. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Regards, |
| 22 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives