Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Hello,
I'd like to request an adopter for eclipse-cdt, since I don't have enough
time to dedicate this package.
Current package status:
- it needs to be updated to the lastest eclipse release available in Debian
(#441313 and possibly root cause for RC bug #5429
tags 480132 + help
thanks
Le lundi 12 mai 2008 à 06:47 +0200, Marcus Better a écrit :
> > AspectJ does compile with gcj and run with gij. But the testsuite has
> > many failures when launched with gij; that's why aspectj is in contrib.
>
> Oh. Can we upload it to main nevertheless with disabled t
Hello Andrew,
Le lundi 28 avril 2008 à 09:44 -0400, Andrew Overholt a écrit :
> This sounds like "rpmstubby" (name can be changed no problem) which I
> hacked up very quickly to "stub" out an RPM specfile from Eclipse plugin
> feature.xml files. It's very rough but it holds potential. I'd really
Hello,
this email summarizes Eclipse current status. A work is in progress to
update existing packages. These are must-have.
Besides these, that are a lot of others packages that could be
packaged. Some of them are available in Fedora already[8]. Fedora
people have developped Eclipse packaging to
Hello Manu,
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 01:33:23AM +0530, Manu Mahajan wrote:
> I am using java-gnome(http://java-gnome.sourceforge.net/) for
> development. The packages available in Debian
> (http://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=names&keywords=libgtk-java)
> refer to the old 2.x branch. The jav
Hello,
A while ago, I wrote:
> > Using the following pakages:
> > * java-gcj-compat{,-dev} 1.0.69-2
> > * ecj, ecj-gcj, libecj-java and libecj-gcj 3.3.0+0728-1
> > * libgcj-bc, libgcj8{-1,-1-awt,-jar} 4.2.1-3
> > * gcc-4.2-base 4.2.1-3
> > * gcj-4.1-base, gcj-4.1, gij-4.1, libgcj7-1 4
Le samedi 26 janvier 2008 à 17:12 +0100, Michael Koch a écrit :
> I have just tried this with SUN JDK 6, Icedtea, gcj 4.3, jamvm and cacao
> with the following result:
>
> SUN JDK 6: Just works.
>
> gcj-4.3: No output at all. Returns with exit code 13.
>
> icedtea: No output at all. Returns with
reassign 432541 gcj-4.2
retitle 432541 gcj-4.2 can no longer compile Eclipse plugins
merge 432539 432541
thanks
Hi,
after having slowly updated an etch chroot to a sid one using
snaphsot.debian.net, I have found that the FTBFS occurs with gcj-4.2,
and is not related to ecj.
Indeed, using the fol
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 02:42:40PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Thomas, please could check with gcj-4.3 (from experimental) / gcc-snapshot?
With:
* gcc-snapshot 20071020-1
* gij-4.3 4.3-20071020-1
I have the same problem; make stops with:
make: *** [build-stamp] Error 13
I'm not ev
Hello Andrew,
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:55:43AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > Moving from an etch chroot to sid, I was able to find out that the
> > following upgrades do not impact eclipse-cdt compilation:
> > * libc6 2.6.1-6
> > * ant 1.7.0-3
> > * eclipse 3.2.2-4
> >
> > This means
Le mercredi 10 octobre 2007 à 12:36 +0200, Thomas Girard a écrit :
> Just another hint on this one: using etch to recompile eclipse-cdt
> *does* work. So it's likely a problem in the toolchain.
Moving from an etch chroot to sid, I was able to find out that the
following upgrades do
Just another hint on this one: using etch to recompile eclipse-cdt
*does* work. So it's likely a problem in the toolchain.
Regards,
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Andrew,
thanks for looking into this.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:15:47PM -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> Try running the launcher directly:
>
> /usr/bin/eclipse -noSplash -application org.eclipse.ant.antRunner (or
> whatever). I think the exit in this case is due to the osgi
> configurati
tags 432541 + help
thanks
I'm really stuck with this one.
This eclipse-cdt FTBFS is always reproducible on amd64 and i386; I have
not tried on other platforms.
Trying to build eclipse-cdt leads to:
cd source-tree/org.eclipse.cdt.releng && \
/usr/lib/jvm/java-gcj/bin/java -cp /usr/lib
Hello,
I have made packages for JacORB and would like them to be reviewed.
There's an associated ITP, #349540, and the original submitter, Gerardo
Curiel, agreed on IRC to let me step in.
If you want to give it a try, use the apt-gettable repo at [0].
Some points worth noticing:
* those package
Barry Hawkins wrote:
[...]
I think you make some excellent points here. In your initial message, I thought
you were advocating the dropping of version numbers and not trying to do
anything
else, which I would consider reckless and unwise. Adopting a solution for
languages
that have a longer h
16 matches
Mail list logo
