Re: javac

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

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?