On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:04 AM, tsuna wrote:
> What would be nice would be to have the ability to recompile only the
> .java that changed. So when you edit 2/3 files, then we'd build just
> that, but in one command.
make can handle this pretty well. If all the source files are listed
as prereq
Jack,
-Original Message-
From: automake-bounces+john.calcote=gmail@gnu.org
[mailto:automake-bounces+john.calcote=gmail@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jack
Kelly
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:34 AM
To: Ralf Wildenhues
Cc: 9...@debbugs.gnu.org; autom...@gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#9088: Java
Hello,
allow me a couple of ranty comments:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:58:01AM CEST:
> I'd rather deprecate the JAVA primary, and then introduce a new `JARS'
> primary, to be used e.g. as follows:
First off, we've _never_ removed support for a primary, and I don't
think
On Saturday 16 July 2011, tsuna wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
> wrote:
> > You're right; the documentation on Java support should be definitely
> > be improved (especially making better distinction between usual bytecode
> > compilation with javac and "native/binary
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Jack Kelly wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
>> wrote:
>>> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar manifests,
>>> jar entry points, or other jar/javac subtleties and
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM, tsuna wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
> wrote:
>> As my java foo is pretty weak, I'm not sure how to handle jar manifests,
>> jar entry points, or other jar/javac subtleties and advanced features.
>> Suggestions welcome.
>
> You can cre
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> You're right; the documentation on Java support should be definitely
> be improved (especially making better distinction between usual bytecode
> compilation with javac and "native/binary compilation" with gcj).
I just sent a trivial pat
[Adding bug-automake in CC:, so that we won't forget about the issue]
On Thursday 14 July 2011, tsuna wrote:
> Hi all,
> whether I like it or not, it so happens that I have a Java project I'm
> trying to package properly, and I'm trying to use autoconf/automake
> for maximum portability and ease
