Request gcc 34 port build gcj

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Jim Trigg wrote:
>> I really would prefer not to reenable the (relatively weak) Java
>> frontend in the lang/gcc34 port for the sake of a single port.
>> 
>> And Java is sufficiently huge a frontend, with the library, that
>> I'd prefer not to burden FreeBSD 4.x users who just need to use
>> lang/gcc34 to build other ports with it.
>> 
>> What do others think?  (One way to address this would be for me
>> to relinguish the lang/gcc34 port as maintainer so that someone
>> else can then make this change.)
> Maybe create a gcj34 port which depends on gcc34 and on which pdftk can 
> depend?

Sorry for not responding earlier -- I suffered severe backlog due to
travelling and broken hardware.

This was suggested twice, and it would address the issue of keeping
the gcc34 port small.  It would, however, not address the issues of
adding extra complexity to the gcc34 port and adding the weak Java
frontend to be found in GCC 3.4 (compared to GCC 4.1).

Again, once we have a volunteer to adopt the lang/gcc34 and make these 
changes, I will hand over maintainership.  I surely do not want to stand
in the way on this.

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Patrick Dung wrote:
> Would you please brifely explain the changes/difference for building
> gcj for gcc 3.x and gcc 4.x port?

There shouldn't be much of a difference in how GCC is configured and
built.  The package lists will differ and so forth, and one may need
to check the static versus shared library cases and so forth, but 
nothing absolutely different.

What is the problem pdftk exhibits with current versions of GCC? What
do the upstream authors say? Can this be reproduced on GNU/Linux as well?

Gerald