#16043: gcc-4.4@20080718_0 No Java support -----------------------------------------------+---------------------------- Reporter: macports@tomorrowenterprises.com | Owner: mww@macports.org Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: Normal | Milestone: Port Bugs Component: ports | Version: 1.6.0 Resolution: | Keywords: java gcj gcc Port: | -----------------------------------------------+---------------------------- Changes (by ryandesign@macports.org): * cc: ryandesign@macports.org (added) Comment: Replying to [comment:4 macports@…]:
Absolutely, and I'm not complaining. I'm just trying to find a way to get GCJ working cleanly in my environment. It appears the 4.2 port is owned by somebody else and is the one I should be able to use, but it doesn't work as stated. I figured it would be better to ask about a port that is under active development.
Actually all the gcc ports are maintained by Markus, according to "`port info`".
Plan B would be a {{{java}}} variant (like the gfortran variant) that enables Java -- of course without guarantee to build (for the beta).
As a user, I think a Java variant would be great.
For the development version of gcc (currently the gcc44 port) a java variant would be ok, if as Markus says it frequently breaks. However I'd prefer no java variant for the stable gcc ports; keep java support on by default there. That way, installation of ports that require gcj (like pdftk) doesn't get more complicated (before: `sudo port install pdftk +gcc42`; after: `sudo port install gcc42 +java && sudo port install pdftk +gcc42`; if java were a variant, and someone didn't know that and/or forgot to first install gcc42 with the +java variant, and just installed pdftk, pdftk wouldn't be able to build because gcc42 would have been built as a dependency without java support, wasting an hour (Intel) or even a day (PowerPC) of the user's time).
I looked for one but couldn't find it; however, it would have saved me lots of time. For instance, the Java variant would have saved me 2 hours to discover that GCC 4.3 + GCJ + Intel only work on OS X 10.5 because port itself would have told me. As it was, I had to download, compile, get the problems, and surf Trac to find an issue that told me.
Until gcc43 was updated to 4.3.2 in r39663, it did not attempt to build java support on Mac OS X 10.4, so you should not have encountered an error. If you did, then that would be a bug in the gcc43 port. Or do you just mean that you were surprised that java support was absent from the gcc43 port? If so, then that surprise should no longer occur on PowerPC due to r39663 (unfortunately Java support for gcc43 cannot be built on Intel with Mac OS X 10.4; see #16409).
So I'd like to see how much work it is in general to get some of this stuff working and offer my assistance. If I'm going to get GCC 4.4 Java working on my system, I might as well share it as a variant for others. Is assisting you with a Java variant an option, should I wait because you'll have it soon, or should I just make things work privately from original sources?
Anyway, long story short, a java variant was added to the gcc44 port in r38947, so this ticket can be closed, can't it? -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/16043#comment:5> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS