Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:16:31 -0400 From: David Sledge <dsledge@appriss.com> To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Q) eclipse 3.2 (Callisto) Message-ID: <44F332FF.5050809@appriss.com> In-Reply-To: <20060828161538.GI89053@vision.anyware> References: <970c0a6b0607280839qc05e2b8p51118955745b7cda@mail.gmail.com> <20060828161538.GI89053@vision.anyware>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > It is already more than one month now since we talked about the
> > port of Eclipse 3.2. Have you been able to have a successful
> > build on a reasonable number of platforms?
>
> > When do you think you will submit a PR to get this update
> > committed?
>
> > Thanks in advance,
>
I have been using the port on FreeBSD 6.1 x86 and amd64 and I believe
you have been using it on FreeBSD 5.5-PRERELEASE x86. I use it for Java,
Ruby and Rails programming for my daily development with CVS and
Subversion repositories and have installed RDT, RadRails and Subclipse
plugins using "software updates". I have also tried a few other plugins
when testing via "software updates", one of which was "VisualEditor". It
installed without errors and installed with the dependencies emf and
gef. I created a small test app and did not see any problems. I also
install CDT from "software updates". It seems that a "standard c
makefile" project works ok but a "managed c makefile" project does not.
It will most like require a port to make "managed c makefile" projects
work. There are two people left who have problems with it. One was have
a problem building with the following options "make -DWITHOUT_GNOMEVFS
-DWITHOUT_CAIRO -DWITHOUT_MOZILLA", where it is trying to build against
files in a "usr/local/include/mozilla-1.0.0" directory. The second
problem was that all files where not being extracted from or put into
the application.jar file on the users opteron(i386). I think he was
able to install it on his amd64 computer though. Both problems I think
might be specific to there computer setup and or selection of installed
ports.
I feel the port itself is solid and ready for the PR to be sent. If
there are no objections I will go ahead and submit it, If there are I
can submit it as eclipse-devel so that maybe a larger user base will
start working with it. If nobody objects my only question is to ask if
it is ok to submit the PR without any other ports that depend on the
3.1.2 version of eclipse being updated first. Or do I need to submit the
port of eclipse 3.2 first so that the other ports can then be updated to
use it?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44F332FF.5050809>