Hallo, On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 11:12:30AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > Stepan Kasal wrote: > > the differences between the two java's (e.g. that jni.h is installed > > to the default include path by gcj but not by openjdk, different > > javadocs) make the good old generic > > BuildRequires: java-devel > > very problematic, so I had to change it to > > BuildRequires: java-1.5.0-gcj-devel > > > > Well, my package builds fine with gcj and my conscience is clear as I > > have reported this, so all is fine. :-) > > Sure, but it would make much more sense to look for jni.h in the right > place: then it would build with either. I would like to move jni.h out > of the compiler's default include path, but then God only knows what > else would break. well http://bugzilla.redhat.com/498964#c1 seems to recommend for i in -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0/include{,/linux}; do java_inc="$java_inc $i" done %configure CPPFLAGS="$java_inc" But I'm afraid that this might not work with gcj or java-1.7.0-opejdk (if it existed). Ideally, I would have a solution general for all the javas, e.g. BuildRequires: java-devel %build for i in -I/usr/include/java{,/linux}; do java_inc="$java_inc $i" done %configure CPPFLAGS="$java_inc" where /usr/include/java would be an alternatives-handled symlink. Id that idea too wild? Is there anything a java-illiterate Fedora packager can do to maka it happen? Cheers, Stepan -- fedora-devel-java-list mailing list fedora-devel-java-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list
