Bug#426141: classpath .95 (or .96) packaged for arm?

[Bob Black]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:35:00AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 02:27:37PM -0600, Bob Black wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 07:14:38AM +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> > > Bob Black wrote:
> > >> Will classpath .95 (or .96) be packaged for arm, or is it basically
> > >> armel only going forward?
> > >>
> > >>   
> > > It's packaged for arm, but it doesn't build:
> > >
> > > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=classpath;ver=2%3A0.96.1-1;arch=arm;stamp=1200397843
> > >
> > > classpath depends on ecj, which depends on gcj, which in turn depends on 
> > > ecj to build, and since there is no gcj-4.2 build for arm, the circularity
> > > at the end of the chain is killing the builds.
> > >
> > > One way to unblock it would be to make ecj depend on jamvm alternatively on 
> > > arm, I guess.
> > 
> > Quick comment with regard to ecj depending on jamvm alternatively on 
> > arm.
> > 
> > Jamvm _may_ need to be updated to 1.5 based on something I saw
> > in the 1.5.0 release notes:
 
> I just uploaded jamvm 1.5.0-1 to the archive. So this should not be a
> problem.

Damn, you debian java guys are awesome.

I almost requested a jamvm 1.5.0 package last night, but figured
I'd try and set up my own crosstools env before bothering you 
any further.

I guess you were already working on it.

>          When jamvm has hit arm I will request a reqbuild of classpath.
> Perhaps thats really enough...
 
Sounds great, I guess I'll watch the mirrors.

Side question, what is a typical build delay?

Bob