On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:35:00AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 02:27:37PM -0600, Bob Black wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 07:14:38AM +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote: > > > Bob Black wrote: > > >> Will classpath .95 (or .96) be packaged for arm, or is it basically > > >> armel only going forward? > > >> > > >> > > > It's packaged for arm, but it doesn't build: > > > > > > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=classpath;ver=2%3A0.96.1-1;arch=arm;stamp=1200397843 > > > > > > classpath depends on ecj, which depends on gcj, which in turn depends on > > > ecj to build, and since there is no gcj-4.2 build for arm, the circularity > > > at the end of the chain is killing the builds. > > > > > > One way to unblock it would be to make ecj depend on jamvm alternatively > > > on > > > arm, I guess. > > > > Quick comment with regard to ecj depending on jamvm alternatively on > > arm. > > > > Jamvm _may_ need to be updated to 1.5 based on something I saw > > in the 1.5.0 release notes: > I just uploaded jamvm 1.5.0-1 to the archive. So this should not be a > problem.
Damn, you debian java guys are awesome. I almost requested a jamvm 1.5.0 package last night, but figured I'd try and set up my own crosstools env before bothering you any further. I guess you were already working on it. > When jamvm has hit arm I will request a reqbuild of classpath. > Perhaps thats really enough... Sounds great, I guess I'll watch the mirrors. Side question, what is a typical build delay? Bob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
