Re: javac

[Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>]

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 :-)