Re: gcj/java status
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 09:53:37AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > Going back to gcj-4.0 for arm could be an alternative, at least simple
> > > programs did compile to native code and run sucessfully. The testsuite
> > > in 4.0 shows over 100 test failures, in 4.1 over 700. Reverting back
> > > to 4.0 for arm would mean to use an older java-gcj-compat for arm as
> > > well. Another alternative would be to replace the gcj runtime with
> > > kaffe, using patches from upstream CVS (suggested by Dalibor Topic).
> > > For etch, I currently don't have the time and hardware resource to
> > > spend work on arm.
> > Could Andrew be correct that this is a sign of an improved testsuite,
> > not a regression in the functionality for arm?
> > A build failure on arm is also the only thing keeping this updated version
> > of gcj-4.1 from being hinted into testing, though that seems to have been an
> > OOD error on the buildd; given back now.
> Is no-one interested in actually fixing this? We could, for the first
> time, get gcj running properly on ARM.
I would love to see that happen, but I'm not an ARM porter and don't have
access to an appropriate ARM development environment that would let me work
on this; so in the absence of any movement in this area, I still need to
know what Debian is going to do with gcj on ARM for the upcoming etch
release.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: