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

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost>]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:43:41AM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
> On 30 September 2016 at 01:19, Sevan / Venture37 <venture37%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> [...removing java from the default build options]
> 
> That would remove it from bulk builds for all platforms, and make it
> unavailable to binary package users. If it were a separate package
> then you could selectively exclude it from the bulk builds of slower
> platforms.

I don't think gcj works well enough to justify the expensive.

Joerg