unsupporting Architecture: mips

2011-07-28 Thread Torsten Werner
Hi, we have discussed the problems with mips in New York at DebConf10 last year. I believe it is time to stop supporting Java on this architecture because nobody really takes care of it. That is why I want to suggest the following radical approach, which needs to be discussed with the release team

Re: unsupporting Architecture: mips

2011-07-28 Thread Rene Engelhard
Hi, On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:58:38PM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > - Get icedtea-7-jre-jamvm built on kfreebsd-*. > - Remove *-gcj packages on all architectures except for a minimal set of > *-gcj packages that are needed to bootstrap openjdk. if openjdk then works (for LibreOffice) on ia64, y

Re: unsupporting Architecture: mips

2011-07-28 Thread Torsten Werner
Hi, Am 28.07.2011 15:58, schrieb Rene Engelhard: > if openjdk then works (for LibreOffice) on ia64, yes, I could live with that. it does not work on ia64? > But, umm, shouldn't you have sent this mail to -mips, too? :-) Let me quote myself: "needs to be discussed with the release team and the m

Re: unsupporting Architecture: mips

2011-07-28 Thread Matthias Klose
On 07/28/2011 03:58 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote: if openjdk then works (for LibreOffice) on ia64, yes, I could live with that. Currently the gcj-using archs for LibreOffice are ia64, kfreebsd-%. mips switched to OpenJDK, mipsel is in limbo... as said in the past, please track it down to a standal

Re: ITS: Re: RFS: annotation-indexer 1.2-1 (new)

2011-07-28 Thread James Page
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 22:14 -0700, tony mancill wrote: > I'll sponsor this. The only issue I see so far is that upstream > doesn't > include a license in all of the source files. However, given that > they're all by the same author and come from the same place (as the > licensed files), it should

Re: unsupporting Architecture: mips

2011-07-28 Thread Ludovic Claude
Hello, Would it be possible to use OpenJDK Zero on Mips, but without the Shark JIT. This would render Java very slow on this architecture, but at least there would be something, and this would reduce the impact on other packages such as Subversion. It looks like this plan is feasible, at least ac

Re: DebConf11: Java Team Meeting and Eclipse Packaging BoF

2011-07-28 Thread tony mancill
On 07/26/2011 06:54 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: > I hope people can join even though I was late in getting them up an running. > I expect the Java Meeting will mostly be about do a status update/health > check on what we are doing (and what we should be doing). We can debate the > "Java Release Go