On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 09:53:37AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: > > > Going back to gcj-4.0 for arm could be an alternative, at least simple > > > programs did compile to native code and run sucessfully. The testsuite > > > in 4.0 shows over 100 test failures, in 4.1 over 700. Reverting back > > > to 4.0 for arm would mean to use an older java-gcj-compat for arm as > > > well. Another alternative would be to replace the gcj runtime with > > > kaffe, using patches from upstream CVS (suggested by Dalibor Topic).
> > > For etch, I currently don't have the time and hardware resource to > > > spend work on arm. > > Could Andrew be correct that this is a sign of an improved testsuite, > > not a regression in the functionality for arm? > > A build failure on arm is also the only thing keeping this updated version > > of gcj-4.1 from being hinted into testing, though that seems to have been > an > > OOD error on the buildd; given back now. > Is no-one interested in actually fixing this? We could, for the first > time, get gcj running properly on ARM. I would love to see that happen, but I'm not an ARM porter and don't have access to an appropriate ARM development environment that would let me work on this; so in the absence of any movement in this area, I still need to know what Debian is going to do with gcj on ARM for the upcoming etch release. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
