bug#9088: the jar fragment

2013-05-19 Thread Michael Zucchi
Forgot the attachment. # 'simulate' automake environment jardir = $(datadir)/java srcdir=../maktest MKDIR_P=mkdir -p VPATH=.:$(srcdir) all: foo.jar ## ## The makefile.am `equivalent' stuff ## ## This user has chosen to make it gnu-make only. ## jar_JARS=foo.jar # sources, all relative to

Re: bug#9088: the jar fragment

2013-05-19 Thread Michael Zucchi
Forgot the attachment. # 'simulate' automake environment jardir = $(datadir)/java srcdir=../maktest MKDIR_P=mkdir -p VPATH=.:$(srcdir) all: foo.jar ## ## The makefile.am `equivalent' stuff ## ## This user has chosen to make it gnu-make only. ## jar_JARS=foo.jar # sources, all relative to

bug#9088: the jar fragment

2013-05-17 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi, This is my current work on the '.jar' fragment. The rest is just there to create a working makefile, but the focus of this post is solely on the 'foo.jar' target fragment. In-so-far as jar generation goes, this should be 'portable and feature complete'. 1) Out of source building. 2)

Re: bug#9088: the jar fragment

2013-05-17 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi, This is my current work on the '.jar' fragment. The rest is just there to create a working makefile, but the focus of this post is solely on the 'foo.jar' target fragment. In-so-far as jar generation goes, this should be 'portable and feature complete'. 1) Out of source building. 2)

bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-16 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 16/05/13 19:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/16/2013 05:57 AM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 15/05/13 22:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/15/2013 01:52 PM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Well if that's a requirement, then it just has to be added right

Re: bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-16 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 16/05/13 19:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/16/2013 05:57 AM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 15/05/13 22:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/15/2013 01:52 PM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Well if that's a requirement, then it just has to be added right

bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-15 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Instead, let's start implementing something *correct*, in line with the Java philosophy, and with a clean API. We'll think about enhancing it when (and if!) the need arise. Seems the way to go. On that, here are a few more thoughts on java's

bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-15 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 15/05/13 22:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/15/2013 01:52 PM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Instead, let's start implementing something *correct*, in line with the Java philosophy, and with a clean API. We'll think about enhancing it when

Re: bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-15 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Instead, let's start implementing something *correct*, in line with the Java philosophy, and with a clean API. We'll think about enhancing it when (and if!) the need arise. Seems the way to go. On that, here are a few more thoughts on java's

Re: bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-15 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 15/05/13 22:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/15/2013 01:52 PM, Michael Zucchi wrote: On 14/05/13 03:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote: Instead, let's start implementing something *correct*, in line with the Java philosophy, and with a clean API. We'll think about enhancing it when

Re: bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-12 Thread Michael Zucchi
On 13/05/13 02:28, Stefano Lattarini wrote: On 05/12/2013 06:29 AM, Michael Zucchi wrote: Using $? will not suffice as a dependency check, as it's trivially easy to create an example which will compile ok after a change but create a broken jar. e.g. add a new abstract method to an abstract

bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-11 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi Stefano, On 10/05/13 22:15, Stefano Lattarini wrote: So, if you are willing to go ahead, you might want to clone the Automake git repository, read the HACKING file, and start perusing the files 'bin/automake.in' and 'lib/am/*.am' for inspiration. Thanks for all this information. I write

bug#9088: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-11 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi again, I (mostly) just have an observation to add to the bug tracker discussion on the dependency generation. Using $? will not suffice as a dependency check, as it's trivially easy to create an example which will compile ok after a change but create a broken jar. e.g. add a new abstract

Re: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-11 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi again, I (mostly) just have an observation to add to the bug tracker discussion on the dependency generation. Using $? will not suffice as a dependency check, as it's trivially easy to create an example which will compile ok after a change but create a broken jar. e.g. add a new abstract

Re: Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-10 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi Stefano, On 10/05/13 22:15, Stefano Lattarini wrote: So, if you are willing to go ahead, you might want to clone the Automake git repository, read the HACKING file, and start perusing the files 'bin/automake.in' and 'lib/am/*.am' for inspiration. Thanks for all this information. I write

Java, JARS primary?

2013-05-08 Thread Michael Zucchi
Hi list, I recently added a tiny bit of java+jni to an auto* configured project, and during the process came across some discussion from about two years ago about improving Java support. As documented on: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9088 So, it seems the JAVA deprecation was