> One solution which comes to my mind would be to make 'libgcj-dev' a real > package like 'gcj' which is provided by 'gcc-defaults' and depends on > the package from the current default gcc version. This would make a > Build-Depends on just 'gcj, libgcj-dev' possible.
Indeed, this would be preferable -- when you first filed this bug I took a look in the hope that this was the case. Alas it was not. Perhaps this is worth taking up with the gcc team? > Anyway, I do not see a reason to explicitly call 'gcj-3.3' instead > of 'gcj' in the Makefiles. The reason is that the gcj-3.3 package only provides /usr/bin/gcj-3.3, not /usr/bin/gcj. The /usr/bin/gcj binary only comes with the generic gcj package, which libreadline-java does not build-depend on. Ben. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
