delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_GC |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
Message-ID: | <4F7BE62A.40906@users.sourceforge.net> |
Date: | Wed, 04 Apr 2012 01:11:54 -0500 |
From: | "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: GCJ related questions |
References: | <BAY147-W509AA41BDF6867B0F674AD04D0 AT phx DOT gbl> <4F7A8F85 DOT 1070201 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4F7B4DE4 DOT 4040502 AT towo DOT net> <4F7BD54E DOT 2000900 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> |
In-Reply-To: | <4F7BD54E.2000900@cwilson.fastmail.fm> |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
On 2012-04-03 23:59, Charles Wilson wrote: > 1) Licensing. If you want to discuss this bit further, take it to the > cygwin-licensing list. Now, ecj is under the EFL-1.0 license, which is > OSI-approved. So, *cygwin* shouldn't have any license compatibility > concerns, thanks to cygwin's "exception" clause in its version of the GPL: A Java jar is not linked against Cygwin in any way, so that was never an issue. > However, it's not clear whether the *gcc* folks are as happy about > co-shipping ecj (if they were, then they would be doing it already). You mean shipping their own copy of ecj? Best practice is *not* to bundle code. > So, stock gcc doesn't directly include ecj even though you'd need it for a > working gcj (bytecode) compiler. Of course not, it is meant to be handled like any other external dependency. > 2) self-hosting. I seem to recall there was some issue with actually > building ecj using cygwin-gcc/gcj, but the details are fuzzy. So there > was some reluctance to include a "binary blob" we can't reproduce from > source; better to let end-users d/l so they can blame "those guys" if > they get a corrupt/malware version? Now *this* is an issue. Building ecj from sources requires ant, whose optional components add a lot of build-time dependencies. However, it is possible with Ports' Java stack, which allows Ports to provide the java-ecj package. Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |