On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 04:15:13PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 10:00:03AM -0400, Joe Phillips wrote: > > > I'm in favor of using the -java for JNI + supporting java classes. > > After all, it's still a Java library - it's just architecture > > dependant. Instead of using -jni, I vote the package be built > > architecture dependant. eg. as opposed to _all.deb it's a _i386.deb. > > I second this. It should be put in the Java policy this way. > > There has been a discussion about native-compiled Java code using > gcj on this list some month ago but no consensus was reached. Maybe > this could be resolved together with the JNI matter now?
They seem very similar so yes it should be resolved. :) Regards. // Ola > Greetings, > Stefan Gybas > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- --------------------- Ola Lundqvist --------------------------- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --------------------------------------------------------------- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
