Re: Thoughts on building lang/gcc packages without Java support

["Sevan / Venture37" <venture37%gmail.com@localhost>]

On 29 September 2016 at 14:48, David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost> wrote:
> Java could be split out into a separate package, (possibly depending
> on the base gcc package).

but the separate package would still be attempted when running bulk builds.

I was proposing the following change at the lang/gcc packages.

Index: lang/gcc44/options.mk
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pkgsrc/lang/gcc44/options.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -p -r1.12 options.mk
--- lang/gcc44/options.mk 25 Feb 2016 14:42:55 -0000 1.12
+++ lang/gcc44/options.mk 30 Sep 2016 00:16:27 -0000
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@

 PKG_OPTIONS_VAR= PKG_OPTIONS.gcc44
 PKG_SUPPORTED_OPTIONS= gcc-inplace-math nls gcc-c++ gcc-fortran
gcc-java gcc-objc #gcc-ada
-PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS= gcc-c++ gcc-fortran gcc-java gcc-objc
+PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS= gcc-c++ gcc-fortran gcc-objc

 PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS.NetBSD+= nls
 PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS.SunOS+= gcc-inplace-math

> Anyone who needs it will need to spend more build time than now (which
> includes bulk builds), but it may still be better overall.

Right, I was hoping to be able to turn around the availability of
packages from bulk builds a little faster on Darwin/PowerPC :)
I'm losing a few days at the moment.

Sevan