Re: Distribute gcc minus gcj? (was Re: Questions about Cygwin's "jar" command)

["Markus Schönhaber" <mks99@t-online.de>]

Shankar Unni wrote:
> Larry Hall wrote:
> 
> 
>>I know I shouldn't answer a question with a question but you 
>>intend this to be rhetorical, right?
>>
>>Never mind.  I'll bite.  If you or someone else is interested 
>>in providing a gcj package, I expect Chris would work with that 
>>person to avoid any package clash.
> 
> 
> No, that wasn't what I meant. I was simply asking if it was possible for
> (and acceptable to) cgf to drop "gcj" from the gcc package. (I.e. not
> provide it at all).
> 
> What I said was that *if* there was some cygwin user who actually was going
> to use gcj for something "real"(TM), they would also be able to build it for
> themselves. (I.e. I'm asserting that dropping gcj is not going to cause
> anyone any major heartburn).

If you're using jar for something "real", it should be much easier for 
you to simply rm jar.exe from /usr/bin than it is for others to build 
gcj from scratch.
I can't see any at least moderately good reason for castrating a package 
just to avoid a "problem" that can be solved by a simple rm or a change 
in PATH.

Regards
   mks


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/