m (1 revision(s)) |
m (added Category:Archived packaging guideline drafts in prep to archive) |
||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
What is the rationale for this proposal? Originally we introduced similar conditionals in the hopes that JPackage would add GCJ support. This goal was only partially met and is arguably no longer important. My feeling is that either a Fedora package supports GCJ or it doesn't and that anyone rpmbuild'ing it should build it as it is built by the Fedora build system. Otherwise people will omit testing their changes against GCJ. (ThomasFitzsimmons) | What is the rationale for this proposal? Originally we introduced similar conditionals in the hopes that JPackage would add GCJ support. This goal was only partially met and is arguably no longer important. My feeling is that either a Fedora package supports GCJ or it doesn't and that anyone rpmbuild'ing it should build it as it is built by the Fedora build system. Otherwise people will omit testing their changes against GCJ. (ThomasFitzsimmons) | ||
[[Category:Archived packaging guideline drafts]] | |||
Revision as of 21:34, 21 February 2009
Build GCJ bits conditionally
Proposal:
Provide a way for user to be able to rebuild any Java package noarch.
Change:
Change ["Packaging/GCJGuidelines"] in the following way:
1. Add sentence "Compilation into native code must be optional and enabled by default, if present." 2. Replace points 1 and 2 with the following (or equivalent):
1. Add the following definition:
%define with_gcj %{!?_without_gcj:1}%{?_without_gcj:0}
1. Conditionally dependencies and be architecture dependent
%if %{with_gcj}
BuildRequires: java-gcj-compat-devel >= 1.0.31
Requires(post): java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.31
Requires(postun): java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.31
%else
BuildArch: noarch
%endif
3. Wrap code snippets in points 3., 4. and 5. as well as one following them in following:
%if %{with_gcj}
...
%endif
Comments
What is the rationale for this proposal? Originally we introduced similar conditionals in the hopes that JPackage would add GCJ support. This goal was only partially met and is arguably no longer important. My feeling is that either a Fedora package supports GCJ or it doesn't and that anyone rpmbuild'ing it should build it as it is built by the Fedora build system. Otherwise people will omit testing their changes against GCJ. (ThomasFitzsimmons)