Re: GCJ Native Proposal
I think some of upstream agrees with me. I don't think calling it bcabi
was ever officially intended.
I think mjw (who is that, Mark?) recommended against both -jbi and
-bcabi and for -gcj. I'm on board with that if we can get other
agreement.
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 07:43 +0200, Michael Koch wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 04:26:19PM -0500, Jerry Haltom wrote:
> > I have no idea what Ubuntu is going to do, as I ran out of time to do
> > it. I will assuradly do what Debian does, so I'm here to influence
> > Debian's decision. ;). Either way, I think bcabi is a stupid name. Even
> > spelled out it doesn't say anything "binary compatible application
> > binary interface". Binary compatible with what? It doesn't say anything
> > at all. Even -native would be better.
>
> You can curse upstream's name for it but you cant eliminate it.
>
>
> Michael
--
Jerry Haltom <wasabi@larvalstage.net>
Reply to: