-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Koch wrote:
[...]
> IMO its now the best time to get rid of this package totally. Its not
> needed anymore. GNU JAXP was merged into GNU classpath some time ago.
> The only package depending on it is libjfreereport-java. I think we can
> just r
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:16:38PM +1000, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > IMO its now the best time to get rid of this package totally.
>
> FWIW, I'd forgotten that java-gcj-compat-dev even existed until your
> mailout to d-d-announce last month ("GCJ 4.1 transition"). In this
> mailout you ask maintain
> IMO its now the best time to get rid of this package totally.
FWIW, I'd forgotten that java-gcj-compat-dev even existed until your
mailout to d-d-announce last month ("GCJ 4.1 transition"). In this
mailout you ask maintainers of JNI packages to use
-I/usr/lib/jvm/java-gcj/include, which relies
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 03:36:56PM +1000, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > No, its enough to rebuild the package with the new gcc package pointing
> > to gcc-4.1 installed.
>
> Sure, but relying on (build-essential + libgcj-dev) assumes that the gcc
> and gcj versions will always be the same. Past experi
> No, its enough to rebuild the package with the new gcc package pointing
> to gcc-4.1 installed.
Sure, but relying on (build-essential + libgcj-dev) assumes that the gcc
and gcj versions will always be the same. Past experience has suggested
this is not the case, which is why I've leaned toward
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:48:01AM +1000, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Probably a solution would be including libgcj7-dev.
>
> It does. It build-depends on libgcj-dev (>= 4:4.1.0), which brings in
> libgcj7-dev.
>
> >From the amd64 build log (which failed in this way):
>
> Unpacking libg
6 matches
Mail list logo
