Re: [PATCH] Merged tree updates in web pages.

[Bryce McKinlay <bryce at albatross dot co dot nz>]

Alexandre Petit-Bianco wrote:

> Here's a patch to update the web page with references to the merged
> tree. I reorganized in build-snapshot.html to only bit of information
> we have on how to build things, since libgcj2.html and gcj2.html are
> terribly outdated (and should probably be removed?)

Yeah.

> I also removed mention of our home made snapshots since the gcc ones
> are already picking libgcj.
>
> What do you think?

Looks good. We can really simplify the complex installation instructions a lot now that there's only one tree.

>    $ cd egcs
>    $ mkdir objdir
>    $ cd objdir
>    $ ../configure --enable-threads=posix --prefix=/home/joerg/gcc \
> -    --enable-libstdcxx-v3 --with-as=/opt/gnu/bin/as --with-ld=/opt/gnu/bin/ld
> +    --enable-shared --enable-java-gc=boehm --disable-new-gxx-abi \
> +    --with-as=/opt/gnu/bin/as --with-ld=/opt/gnu/bin/ld
>    $ make bootstrap
> +  $ make
>    $ make install

We should probibly add "--enable-languages=c++,java" to this? And I think the "--enable-java-gc=boehm" can be removed,
since we default to having that on.

> -The most current official release of libgcj is 2.95.1. Libgcj 2.95.1 is available
> -from
> +The most current official release of libgcj is 2.95.1. Libgcj 2.95.1
> +is available from
>  <a href="ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/java/libgcj-2.95.1.tar.gz">
> -ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/java/libgcj-2.95.1.tar.gz
> -</a>
> -
> -
> +   ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/java/libgcj-2.95.1.tar.gz </a>

Honestly, what we should really say here is something like "The official current release is still 2.95.1, but it is
broken and we don't reccomend using it."

> +
> +The easiest way to get libgcj is to check it out from the gcc cvs
> +repository. Here's how perform an anonymous <A
> +HREF="http://gcc.gnu.org/cvs.html">read-only</A> CVS access:
> +

Shouldn't we just reference the gcc instructions for this? Doesn't seem to be much point in duplicating it....


> -       same "--prefix" directory.
> +       same "--prefix" directory. Note, this shouldn't be a problem anymore if
> +       you use new and current unified tree.
>         </blockquote>
>        </dl>

... and we should probibly just delete some of these obsolete FAQs. Less is more.

regards

  [ bryce ]