On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:00 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:04 AM, tsuna wrote:
>> What would be nice would be to have the ability to recompile only the
>> .java that changed. So when you edit 2/3 files, then we'd build just
>> that, but in one command.
>
> make can handle th
On Wednesday 27 July 2011, NightStrike wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:04 AM, tsuna wrote:
> > What would be nice would be to have the ability to recompile only the
> > .java that changed. So when you edit 2/3 files, then we'd build just
> > that, but in one command.
>
> make can handle this
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:04 AM, tsuna wrote:
> What would be nice would be to have the ability to recompile only the
> .java that changed. So when you edit 2/3 files, then we'd build just
> that, but in one command.
make can handle this pretty well. If all the source files are listed
as prereq
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Ralf Wildenhues
wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:58:01AM CEST:
>> I'd rather deprecate the JAVA primary, and then introduce a new `JARS'
>> primary, to be used e.g. as follows:
>
> First off, we've _never_ removed support for a primary
Hi Jack,
* Jack Kelly wrote on Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 09:33:58AM CEST:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Jack Kelly wrote on Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 06:13:58AM CEST:
> >> Perhaps there should be support for a foo_jar_JARADD, that by analogy
> >> to _LDADD, that specifies a
Jack,
-Original Message-
From: automake-bounces+john.calcote=gmail@gnu.org
[mailto:automake-bounces+john.calcote=gmail@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jack
Kelly
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:34 AM
To: Ralf Wildenhues
Cc: 9...@debbugs.gnu.org; automake@gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#9088: Java
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Jack Kelly wrote on Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 06:13:58AM CEST:
>> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> >> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar
Hello,
allow me a couple of ranty comments:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:58:01AM CEST:
> I'd rather deprecate the JAVA primary, and then introduce a new `JARS'
> primary, to be used e.g. as follows:
First off, we've _never_ removed support for a primary, and I don't
think
* Jack Kelly wrote on Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 06:13:58AM CEST:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> >> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar manifests,
> >> jar entry points, or other jar/javac subtletie
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
> wrote:
>> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar manifests,
>> jar entry points, or other jar/javac subtleties and advanced features.
>> Suggestions welcome.
>
> You can cre
On Saturday 16 July 2011, tsuna wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
> wrote:
> > You're right; the documentation on Java support should be definitely
> > be improved (especially making better distinction between usual bytecode
> > compilation
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Jack Kelly wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
>> wrote:
>>> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar manifests,
>>> jar entry points, or other jar/javac subtleties and
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> You're right; the documentation on Java support should be definitely
> be improved (especially making better distinction between usual bytecode
> compilation with javac and "native/binary compilation" with gcj)
edhat.com/automake/automake.html#Java which seems to
> be closer to what I want.
>
You're right; the documentation on Java support should be definitely
be improved (especially making better distinction between usual bytecode
compilation with javac and "native/binary compilation&qu
n
properly autotoolized projects), not to mention all the usual benefits
that the autotools provide out of the box.
I'm aware of http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html#Java-Support
(support via GCJ) but that's not what I want. Most of the Java people
don't use GCJ, they
nstallation for those parts.
The Java part has been difficult, but not impossible, thanks
to the docs, mailing lists, and java.apache.org. Now,
though, I am starting to run into some apparently nasty
issues, so I wanted to find out a little more about this
territory.
First, what is the state of
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: 08 Nov 2002 09:40:21 +
> >
> > Would the auto* tool maintainers be interested in hearing more about
> > automakejar's functionality? Perhaps with a view to implementing
> > similar functionality in automake?
>
> May
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: 08 Nov 2002 09:40:21 +
>
> Would the auto* tool maintainers be interested in hearing more about
> automakejar's functionality? Perhaps with a view to implementing
> similar functionality in automake?
Maybe. Do you have a URL or brief summary explaining the a
Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
> >>From: "Eric Lemings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:23:28 -0700
> >>
> >>After reading through Section 11.4 of the Automake Manual, I was just =
> >>curious about how well future releases of Automake (and Autoconf) ar
Paul Eggert wrote:
From: "Eric Lemings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:23:28 -0700
After reading through Section 11.4 of the Automake Manual, I was just =
curious about how well future releases of Automake (and Autoconf) are =
going to support distributions with Java source code. J
> From: "Eric Lemings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:23:28 -0700
>
> After reading through Section 11.4 of the Automake Manual, I was just =
> curious about how well future releases of Automake (and Autoconf) are =
> going to support distributions with Java source code. Just for
Hello all,
After reading through Section 11.4 of the Automake
Manual, I was just curious about how well future releases of Automake (and
Autoconf) are going to support distributions with Java source code. Just
for the record, could the maintainers chime in on plans for Java?
Thanks,
Eric
22 matches
Mail list logo
