[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: questions about kaffe

"Susan G. Kleinmann" <sgk@netbox.kleinmann.com> writes:

> After pondering the kaffe package, the Debian Java FAQ, and the BTS for a 
> while, I still have a number of questions, and hope this list can provide 
> answers or advice.  
>   Why doesn't kaffe have the compiler (kjc) included in it?

IIRC, kjc still has a few kinks that need to be worked out.  I
remember running `make check` with kjc given me four failed checks
while jikes only gave one (which seemed to be due to a bug in the

>   Why is /usr/lib/kaffe/bin/kjc in the kaffe package, but the jar file it
>     seems to depend on, (kjc.jar) is not?

Packaging oversight?
>   Ditto for /usr/lib/kaffe/bin/kopi.

See kjc.  This compiler is perhaps even more beta than kjc.

>   If kaffe has no binaries in /usr/bin, then how is it distinguished from
>      a library package?  If not, then why isn't it called something like
>      kaffe-dev?

The things I would expect in a kaffe-dev package do not include the VM
and the core libs.  These things are necessary just to run stuff.
It's things like javac, javap, javadoc, kaffeh and /usr/include I'd
expect in a kaffe-dev package.  Well, there may be some more.  The
size of such a package would be rather small and depend on kaffe
anyway, so ...
>   Why are the binaries for kaffe not in /usr/bin?  Is it because there 
>      are no man pages for the individual binaries (except kaffe itself)?

Who knows?  BTW, the kaffe man page is outdated.

One reason I could think of is that it is easy this way to switch
between the various Java dists.  Just set your PATH to point to the
one you want to use.

   bash$ export PATH=/usr/lib/kaffe/bin:$PATH

and bang! you are sure you're using kaffe.  Of course, I don't see the
problem of sticking kaffe in /usr/bin, but that may be me.  Add
kaffec, kaffep, kaffedoc etc to taste.

>   To be conformant with Debian Java policy, is it necessary to make links 
>      between the real locations of the jar files in the kaffe package and
>      /usr/share/java?

Don't recall the details, but anyway, the policy is only a proposal.

>   The kaffe source package has a number of options to support a kaffe 
>      installation that coexists with a javasoft installation, i.e., one can 
>      add modify the names of all of the kaffe binaries using 
>      --program-prefix, --program-suffix, --program-transform-name.
>      Is it not desirable to use these?  

Any executable names that would conflict with other packages should be
handled via the alternatives mechanism.

Olaf Meeuwissen       Epson Kowa Corporation, Research and Development

Reply to: