From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 12 11:25:55 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD00016A4CE
	for <freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:25:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from svbcf02.win.tue.nl (svbcf02.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.100])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA47243D46
	for <freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:25:54 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mriem@win.tue.nl)
Received: from SENSEI (v019.vpn.tue.nl [131.155.212.19])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B6EAC8C04; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:25:52 +0100 (MET)
From: "Manfred Riem" <mriem@win.tue.nl>
To: <gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch>,
	"'Herve Quiroz'" <herve.quiroz@esil.univ-mrs.fr>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:25:48 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
In-Reply-To: <1731722915.20040312194338@buz.ch>
Thread-Index: AcQIYYnN4+OPVDbiRl63Slwqkuba+QABOr4A
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-Id: <20040312192552.B6EAC8C04@svbcf02.win.tue.nl>
cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: RE: Re[2]: PKGNAMEPREFIX for Java ports
X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD <freebsd-java.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java>,
	<mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-java>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-java@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java>,
	<mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:25:55 -0000

Hi Gabriel,

> >> I think it's not so bad to have Java ports in the java directory
> >> considering what PITA it is to build Java (even on a fast machine, it
> >> takes forever and that's only the tip of the ice berg). 

That's why we need to help out in testing so a diablo release of
1.4 is there soon. 

> Well obviously the Java ports all have the JDK as dependency ;-) And
> installing the JDK is a rather painful task no matter how fast your
> machine is.

Time consuming OK, painful not at all.

> But I get your point about getting rid of ports/java/ (especially bad
> as some tools aren't even in there but in the category they belong, I
> know I had to search for ant more than just once ;-).

So who is going to enter the PR's and take this one forward?

Regards,

Manfred Riem
mriem@win.tue.nl
http://www.riaca.win.tue.nl/