Hello, On 01/04/14 08:16, Jan Henke wrote: > after the recent discussions about FTBFS due to gcj, I would like to > discuss the future of gcj in general here. The thread at [1] brings it > pretty much to the point I think, while gcj will not go away, there is > basically no further development to be expected upstream. Together with > the (now) increasing development of the language, Java 8 got released > just two weeks ago, the usefulness of gcj as a JVM is IMHO questionable. > I think currently there is no other option besides OpenJDK. I understood > that gcj is still needed to build OpenJDK-6/-7, but I currently see no > practical use for it beyond that.
I fully agree with this! Much as I was saying here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2014/03/msg00126.html > The OpenJDK-8 upstream source code seems to have some *BSD support, but > due to some problems I cannot try to build it on kFreeBSD right now. The > question now is how we can proceed? I've been waiting to see if a Debian package appears, and then we can work towards making it build on kfreebsd. > I think it is important to improve > the OpenJDK availability in kFreeBSD and slowly think about phasing out > gcj all together (if possible). Yes, I think it would be good to have consistency across all release architectures. > I like to help where possible, but I am neither DM nor DD and so far I > do not have experience in building OpenJDK. So I am absolutely not sure > what I can do right now. We could certainly use any kind of help to keep up with openjdk-7 updates. I didn't have any experience of this either, but once I'd set up a kfreebsd machine with enough memory and diskspace to build it, it was easy to refresh the patches needed for openjdk-7 to build again. I imagine openjdk-8 will be more difficult to maintain in the beginning, but at least there seems to be a package for it in FreeBSD ports already: http://www.freshports.org/java/openjdk8/ Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
