groan: installation

Mark Wielaard
Mon Nov 4 15:32:00 GMT 2002


On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 09:08, Per Bothner wrote:
> Ant has one very major flaw from the point of GCJ:
> It is implemented in Java.  Requiring a working implementation
> of Java before you can build GCJ would complicate things.  It is
> not a fundamental problem GNU Java is written in Java.  But that
> does make building it more difficult.  I don't think any
> potential benefits of Ant are likely to compensate for that.
> (Of course someone could re-implement Ant in C.)

Maybe not what you are looking for. And I have never used it. But I
cannot help myself, so I must give you this probably useless trivia:

DotGNU Portable.NET
contains a C port of NAnt (which is based on Ant, but written in C#)

Which can be found at

    This program is similar in behaviour to "NAnt"
    (, except that it is written in C instead of
    C#.  This makes it a little less flexible in some ways.
    A core tenet of the Portable.NET design philosophy is that it must
    be self-bootstrapping.  That is, the build must not rely upon any
    "magic binaries" that must be built with other tools prior to
    building Portable.NET.  The only "magic" that we permit is the
    C compiler.
    "NAnt" is not self-bootstrapping.  It must be built against the C#
    system library, but that library itself is built using something
    like "NAnt".  This creates a "magic binary" dependency.
    Hence, we have provided this C version to bootstrap the compilation
    of the C# system library.  Application programmers can then build
    and use "NAnt" to achieve as much flexibility as they desire.



More information about the Java mailing list