Bug#267036: marked as done (wanted: gcj compiled native package)

Tue Mar 22 00:09:02 2005

Your message dated Tue, 22 Mar 2005 02:00:14 -0500
with message-id <e03b90ae050321230024751780@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line rethinking
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Aug 2004 10:52:44 +0000
>From jeff@jab.org Fri Aug 20 03:52:44 2004
Return-path: <jeff@jab.org>
Received: from rdns.194.240.218.216.fre.communitycolo.net (toko.jab.org) [216.218.240.194] (mail)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1By70m-00041l-00; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:52:44 -0700
Received: from jeff by toko.jab.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1By70h-0002vh-00; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:52:39 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jeff Breidenbach <jeff@jab.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: wanted: gcj compiled native package
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.35
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:52:39 -0700
Message-Id: <E1By70h-0002vh-00@toko.jab.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: liblucene-java
Severity: wishlist
Tags: sid

Lucene can be compiled down to native code using gcj (or so I read,
especially noticing projects like pylucene). I think that would be
something nice to offer on Debian. I haven't quite been able to get
the darn thing to compile yet, so any and all help would be
appreciated.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux toko 2.4.20-xfs #1 SMP Die Dez 10 20:07:25 CET 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 267036-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Mar 2005 07:00:15 +0000
>From breidenbach@gmail.com Mon Mar 21 23:00:15 2005
Return-path: <breidenbach@gmail.com>
Received: from rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.196] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DDdN9-0005K6-00; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:00:15 -0800
Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id g11so1310605rne
        for <267036-done@bugs.debian.org>; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:00:14 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=N/oLAchaW5eEihndlFQyi5/9mh7jPj8MIrLHaoXudY0I3HMvyOeauy1rYc28idtsRqF8Cce75SjQheBTS9IPoUCnLJTy+3W1l06V9jBzYtfP0s2doV1X8RL6J5rH6xOMv/zNRD6IyKJ7W8pEbMxiI3JkD1X8QmQIV5+wG+iHtvU=
Received: by 10.38.162.43 with SMTP id k43mr5251470rne;
        Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:00:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.38.98.18 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:00:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e03b90ae050321230024751780@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 02:00:14 -0500
From: Jeff Breidenbach <breidenbach@gmail.com>
Reply-To: jeff@jab.org
To: 267036-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: rethinking
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: 267036-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,ONEWORD autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

I've decided I don't want this anymore. Native versions of Java packages
are to "big picture" to handle at the package level, and besides, it would
probably cause Lucene to not build on architectures where gcj is not steller
and/or there isn't enough memory. Let's see what recommendations come
out of the Debian Java subproject before having Lucene bite this off.