Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 21:21:06 +0900 From: Fuyuhiko Maruyama <fuyuhik8@is.titech.ac.jp> To: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: jdk1.3.1 awt exception, plugin, OpenJIT Message-ID: <55itfb107h.wl@tripper.private> In-Reply-To: <20010826113923.A8065@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <20010825120422.A18841@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108242313120.8716-100000@daedalus.cs.brandeis.edu> <20010825130721.A20869@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <55wv3sqxtc.wl@tripper.private> <20010826040557.A87652@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <55u1yvrij8.wl@tripper.private> <20010826113923.A8065@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:39:23 +0930, Greg Lewis wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 05:28:27AM +0900, Fuyuhiko Maruyama wrote: > > At Sun, 26 Aug 2001 04:05:57 +0930, > > Greg Lewis wrote: > > > > > > > > Making symbolic link > > > > /usr/local/jdk1.3.1/include/freebsd->/usr/local/jdk1.3.1/include/bsd > > > > and > > > > /usr/local/jdk1.3.1/include-old/freebsd->/usr/local/jdk1.3.1/include-old/bsd > > > > may also fix the problem. > > > > > > Will it be easier if the build installs these include files in freebsd > > > rather than bsd? I think maybe that is more correct, what are your > > > thoughts? > > I think installing those files in freebsd is not so good because our > > J2SDK tree isn't only for FreeBSD but also for NetBSD and OpenBSD even > > if currently it runs only on FreeBSD. From OpenJIT's point of view, > > porting OpenJIT for NetBSD or OpenBSD may be easy as it already > > supports Linux and FreeBSD by almost same codes, so placing those > > include files in `bsd' is not so bad -- it simplifies our configure > > scripts. The problem caused by the directory name can be solved by > > modifing OpenJIT's configure scripts and it is quite easy and already > > finished. > > Well, what I actually meant was what if we install the includes in > freebsd on FreeBSD, netbsd on NetBSD, etc. I.e. we use the `actual' > platform rather than the meta bsd platform name as the directory > name. That strikes me as maybe being the scheme that some code > assumes. How does it affect to the mainteinanciblity of J2SDK tree for FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD? I think this should be the most elemental basis of the decision. -- Fuyuhiko MARUYAMA <fuyuhik8@is.titech.ac.jp> Matsuoka laboratory, Department of Mathematical and Computing Sciences, Graduate School of Information Science and Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55itfb107h.wl>