From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23399 invoked by alias); 7 May 2009 17:24:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 23386 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2009 17:24:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com (HELO skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com) (69.145.82.195) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 May 2009 17:24:21 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.6] (adsl-dynamic-207-14-160-55.bridgeband.net [207.14.160.55]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D835582A7; Thu, 7 May 2009 10:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A03193F.4020005@boreham.org> Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 17:24:00 -0000 From: David Boreham User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Haley CC: Mark Wielaard , Andrew John Hughes , Chris Gray , bmckinlay , svferro , java Subject: Re: GCJ with OpenJDK Java API instead of GNU Classpath References: <17c6771e0905070828n441803edx6cf6291ed9b01e5e@mail.gmail.com> <1241713494.3769.6.camel@fedora.wildebeest.org> <4A030CE7.6050309@redhat.com> <1241716199.3769.16.camel@fedora.wildebeest.org> <4A031855.3030505@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4A031855.3030505@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00026.txt.bz2 Andrew Haley wrote: > That doesn't make it not a serious option. It just means that > you don't want to do it, and you don't think that the gcj > community should do it. It's still a serious option. > Not really. The problem is that the test can only be run by special people under special circumstances. So only the binaries produced by those special people can be said to have passed the test. People in general can't run the test, reproduce its results, test bug fixes, and so on. Therefore it's not a useful option for an open source project.