On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Per Bothner wrote: > Ben Burton wrote: > > >>Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is) > >>should be fixed to provide java-runtime. > >> > > > >Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the gcc > >maintainers not to provide java-runtime (for reasons such as command-line > >incompatibility, etc). > > > The "gij" command tries to be more-or-less compatible with the "java" > command. > > If by "gcc maintainers" you means the Debian gcc maintainers, I don't know > who they are. But if you mean the people actually developing gcj, well I > don't know if any of them are involved in maintaining Debian packages.
Yes, well, it's not. I have found that, in theory, gcj and gij are compatible, in reality they are not. To be compatable, they *MUST* take *EXACTLY* the same arguments as other standard $(JAVA) and $(JAVAC). I've had to put special code into my own build system to switch between standard jvms and the gcj suite.
