Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
[RFC] Removing support for GCJ and GCJFLAGS from dpkg?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Guillem Jover
Aug 30, 2023, 8:30:04 PM8/30/23
to
Hi!
While going through the supported compilers and build flags recently,
I noticed that dpkg-buildflags and the various dpkg Makefile fragment
files still have support for gcj, but that compiler seems to have
stopped being maintained some time ago. According to Wikipedia
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_for_Java>) the final
release was in 2018, and we do not even have it in Debian anymore.
So I guess it should be fine to rip that off? A quick codesearch.d.n
didn't reveal much of a usage. But I'd like to hear whether this would
break or disrupt things, before I consider removing these.
Thanks,
Guillem
While going through the supported compilers and build flags recently,
I noticed that dpkg-buildflags and the various dpkg Makefile fragment
files still have support for gcj, but that compiler seems to have
stopped being maintained some time ago. According to Wikipedia
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_for_Java>) the final
release was in 2018, and we do not even have it in Debian anymore.
So I guess it should be fine to rip that off? A quick codesearch.d.n
didn't reveal much of a usage. But I'd like to hear whether this would
break or disrupt things, before I consider removing these.
Thanks,
Guillem
tony mancill
Aug 30, 2023, 11:40:05 PM8/30/23
to
Hi Guillem,
No concerns from the Debian Java team. I can't imagine any breakage,
but if there is any fall-out, it would be due to cruft that we should
clean up anyway. The dependency on gcj-jdk was dropped from javahelper
(src:javatools) for buster [0].
Thanks for catching this.
Cheers,
tony
[0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892530
but if there is any fall-out, it would be due to cruft that we should
clean up anyway. The dependency on gcj-jdk was dropped from javahelper
(src:javatools) for buster [0].
Thanks for catching this.
Cheers,
tony
[0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892530
Emmanuel Bourg
Aug 31, 2023, 1:30:04 PM8/31/23
to
Hi Guillem,
On 31/08/2023 02:23, Guillem Jover wrote:
> So I guess it should be fine to rip that off?
Yes go ahead, GCJ is long dead and gone, you can remove the remaining
references safely.
Emmanuel Bourg
On 31/08/2023 02:23, Guillem Jover wrote:
> So I guess it should be fine to rip that off?
references safely.
Emmanuel Bourg
Guillem Jover
Sep 1, 2023, 6:00:04 AM9/1/23
to
Hi!
On Wed, 2023-08-30 at 20:35:40 -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> No concerns from the Debian Java team. I can't imagine any breakage,
> but if there is any fall-out, it would be due to cruft that we should
> clean up anyway. The dependency on gcj-jdk was dropped from javahelper
> (src:javatools) for buster [0].
> [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892530
On Thu, 2023-08-31 at 19:19:50 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Yes go ahead, GCJ is long dead and gone, you can remove the remaining
> references safely.
Thanks both for the confirmation! I've queued the attached patch which
will be included in my next git push targeting dpkg 1.22.1.
Regards,
Guillem
On Wed, 2023-08-30 at 20:35:40 -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> No concerns from the Debian Java team. I can't imagine any breakage,
> but if there is any fall-out, it would be due to cruft that we should
> clean up anyway. The dependency on gcj-jdk was dropped from javahelper
> (src:javatools) for buster [0].
On Thu, 2023-08-31 at 19:19:50 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Yes go ahead, GCJ is long dead and gone, you can remove the remaining
> references safely.
will be included in my next git push targeting dpkg 1.22.1.
Regards,
Guillem
0 new messages