On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 11:27:26AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> The only reason why I added icedtea7 and kept icedtea6 was that I
> previously did not know that icedtea7 could be bootstrapped with GCJ.
> In the first attempt to get icedtea7 to compile I used icedtea6 to build
> it. Now that this
Andreas Enge writes:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 07:33:56PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> > I would also like to suggest changing the names ‘icedtea6’ and
>> > ‘icedtea7’ to just ‘icedtea’. They cannot be installed into the same
>> > profile anyway and users will most likely want the latest versi
Hi Ricardo,
do you have an answer to the question below?
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 07:33:56PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > I would also like to suggest changing the names ‘icedtea6’ and
> > ‘icedtea7’ to just ‘icedtea’. They cannot be installed into the same
> > profile anyway and users will mos
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:46:38PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Attached is a patch to move our ‘icedtea7’ package to the 2.6.x series
> (the 2.5.x series will only get one more release).
The patch looks good to me.
> I would also like to suggest changing the names ‘icedtea6’ and
> ‘icedtea7’ t
Attached is a patch to move our ‘icedtea7’ package to the 2.6.x series
(the 2.5.x series will only get one more release).
I would also like to suggest changing the names ‘icedtea6’ and
‘icedtea7’ to just ‘icedtea’. They cannot be installed into the same
profile anyway and users will most likely w
