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

Re: Solving the default-jdk-builddep mess

On Mon Apr 12 13:58, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> -gcj please, it's not needed just for for JNI, that should be clear. I also
>> agree that there's no need to have a default-jdk+gcj builddep, you can just
>> depend on both if you need both. I don't know whether gcj-jdk is suitable for
>> that, if not then a similarly named meta-package.
> No. It shouldn't be an extra build-dependency. See my followup to Torsten.

AIUI you were complaining about the specific use of gcj-jdk. I'm suggesting
that we have a meta package for jdk and a metapackage for -gcj packages and
depend on jdk, -gcj; rather than what we have at the moment which is a jdk
metapackage and a jdk-gcj metapackage, and you depend on one or the other.


Matthew Johnson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: