On 22/02/17 05:52, R0b0t1 wrote: > I have found GCJ to be one of the best methods for bootstrapping > OpenJDK. No other method of adding support for new architectures that > does not involve working closely with OpenJDK upstream is known to me.
That doesn't matter any more because OpenJDK has full cross-compiler support. > Many of the users of GCJ and GNU Classpath do not know they are users > and, even if they do know, are not aware that it is being considered > for removal from the GCC nor aware of this mailing list. The GNU Java > frontend is often the only usable "JRE" for poorly supported, old, or > very new systems. Users of these systems need Java environments first > produced with GCJ or GCJ itself. I don't think that's true any more: OpenJDK supports just as many GNU/Linux systems as did GCJ, as far as I know. Perhaps more. The Zero VM allows OpenJDK to run on anything that has a working C++ compiler. > That the Java capabilities are not receiving development does not mean > they are not useful, nor is that a good reason to remove them. That's easy for you to say. Systems must be maintained or they rot. We need maintainers. Andrew.
