On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Bill Janssen wrote:
Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org> wrote:
I was making suggestions in the context of simplifying the common
case: PyLucene users don't care (they're Python users first) what Java
version they use or have and just want it to work (tm). They're happy
to just have one version of Java installed and put it on their PATH. I
could be wrong, of course with 'happy', of course.
Will gcj support PyLucene these days? If so, you're fine.
I doubt it. Just including the headers fails.
Also, supporting gcj via JNI would make me cringe since it has a much better
C++ interface into Java. It would need custom code to take advantage of it.
Does gcj have a future, is it worth the effort ?
If not, the Java-ignorant folks you're postulating will be receiving a
package that will be broken more often than not
No, only on RedHat, and they're moving to OpenJDK like everyone else.
and will have a hard
time understanding why that's the case. Wouldn't you rather have
something that works more often than not?
The error message would clearly state that they're using a version of Java
that is not supported. I don't understand why they couldn't understand it.
Maybe the state of Java-on-Linux is quite different by now. I worked
all this out a couple of years ago, when all my Linux users kept
tripping over the default Java being gcj.
It's still common on RedHat. On other distros, either Sun JDK or OpenJDK is
there. I just hit that on Fedora Core 11.
Andi..
