This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: libjava "make install" is broken again

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
Cc: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>, Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 04 Mar 2002 13:21:49 -0700
Subject: Re: libjava "make install" is broken again
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10203032135060.3438-100000@mars.deadcafe.org> <3C82E315.7010205@waitaki.otago.ac.nz> <jevgccip49.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com

>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:

Bryce> libzgcj.so is silly. Linux systems at least seem to have a
Bryce> libz.so anyway, so we should just use that if it is available.

Andreas> There is already --with-system-zlib.

Yes; the idea is that system integrators should use this option when
building binary packages.  Whether they do, I don't know (well, I know
Red Hat does).

I don't recall why we don't just try to detect the library at build
time.  There might not be a good reason (other than laziness, probably
mine, when the configure code was written).

Tom

Follow-Ups:
- Re: libjava "make install" is broken again
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

References:
- Re: libjava "make install" is broken again
  - From: Jeff Sturm
- Re: libjava "make install" is broken again
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: libjava "make install" is broken again
  - From: Andreas Schwab

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]