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

Re: Solving the default-jdk-builddep mess

On Mon Apr 12 19:57, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 12.04.2010 14:40, Torsten Werner wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Matthew Johnson schrieb:
>>> 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.
>> We should come up with a name - gcj-native-helper maybe?
> if this is available on all archs and doesn't do anything if gcj is not  
> available, then yes.

Yes, although if you are trying to build a -gcj package on an architecture
which does not have gcj, possibly failing the dependency is actually correct....

Matthew Johnson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: