PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default

[Jeff Law]

  On 11/01/10 12:16, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 15:09, Ian Lance Taylor<iant@google.com>  wrote:
>
>> Comments?  Approvals?
> FWIW, I agree with this patch for the same reasons stated by Ian.
> Other than massively increasing build times, I have not seen
> substantial benefits for having java enabled by default.  Ada, on the
> other hand, has shown more usefulness in exposing bugs (particularly,
> middle end) and is many times faster.
>
> This is the kind of patch that requires more consensus or agreement
> from the java maintainers.  aph, are you dead set against disabling
> java?  Is there anything we could do to change your mind?
Building libjava (at least for me) is primarily painful due to 2 files 
(the names escape me) and the rather poor coarse level parallelism 
(can't build the 32bit and 64bit multilibs in parallel for example).

Has anyone looked at fixing the build machinery for libjava to make it 
more sensible?

I'd personally prefer java over ada as I'm able to understand java code 
easier, thus when something does go wrong I'm able to debug it much faster.

Jeff