Santiago Vila writes: > Matthias Klose wrote: > > Santiago Vila writes: > > > Is there any particular reason why gcj does not set up a symlink > > > javac -> gcj using the alternatives mechanism, as jikes used to do before > > > Bug #43730 was reported? > > > > an alternative should only be provided, if a reasonable set of options > > match. Unfortunately the options for gcj and javac are rather > > disjunct. For java/gij, Stephen Zander provided a wrapper script. I'd > > happy to include such a script for javac/gcj as well. > > > > > ( The new gettext-0.11 checks for a java compiler named "javac" but it > > > does not find "gcj". I'm not sure who exactly to blame for this :-) > > > > everybody knowing of this and not writing a wrapper could be blamed ;-) > > Would it be acceptable, then, if I make gettext to Build-Depend on a specific > Java compiler, once I check it works with such compiler? > > For example, would "Build-Depends: gcj" be acceptable?
gcj only works on i386, powerpc, m68k, sparc, s390, alpha and ia64. if gettext works with gcj on these architectures, it is acceptable :-)