From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update IcedTea. Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:38:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20150907093853.GA7127@debian> References: <20150722173356.GA10681@debian> <20150907091522.GA6670@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56855) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZYstM-0002g2-GL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2015 05:39:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZYstI-0000Dr-Dn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2015 05:39:12 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.130]:60534) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZYstI-0000Dn-4G for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2015 05:39:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 'Guix-devel' On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 11:27:26AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > The only reason why I added icedtea7 and kept icedtea6 was that I > previously did not know that icedtea7 could be bootstrapped with GCJ. > In the first attempt to get icedtea7 to compile I used icedtea6 to build > it. Now that this is no longer required, I think there is no good > reason not to rename “icedtea7” to “icedtea” and drop icedtea6. Great! > It should be noted, though, that “icedtea7” inherits from “icedtea6” and > dropping “icedtea6” would either require a rewrite of the package > definition for “icedtea7” or force us to retain the “icedtea6” > definition (making it private). Rewriting the icedtea(7) definition sounds like the proper solution to me. Thanks! Andreas