This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: `make install` should install the info files in java
- To: tromey at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: `make install` should install the info files in java
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 17:30:45 -0700
- Cc: per at bothner dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <871yr9n5s3.fsf@creche.redhat.com>
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
Tom> It is in the source tree because it is an uncommon program
Tom> and because it is required to build libgcj.
There are three issues here:
- Should fastjar be in the source tree?
- Should fastjar be installed?
- Should it be installed as `fastjar' or `jar'?
My opinions, for what it's worth:
- If it's going to be installed, it should be called `jar'. I agree
with Per that `fastjar' is analagous to `make'. I'm assuming
that the command-line options are similar to the same utility
from other vendors.
- If it's not going to be installed, then it should not be in the
source tree. It is a program, like `make' or `bison' that you
have to download and build in order to build GCC. If we're not
installing it, then `configure' should just look for `jar'. If
it finds it, good; otherwise, it should say "Can't build GCJ;
you must install jar".
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com