Re: Does Eclipse 3.1 on FC4 include WTP and/or WST?

From: Klaasjan Brand (klaasjan_at_gmail.com)
Date: 07/23/05

  • Next message: Dave Gutteridge: "tcl and tk location on FC4"
    Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:58:46 +0200
    To: Andrew Overholt <overholt@redhat.com>
    
    

    On 7/22/05, Andrew Overholt <overholt@redhat.com> wrote:
    > those. A few people have talked about submitting the WTP to Fedora Extras
    > and I can see that happening sometime soon. If anyone's interested in
    > helping with this, contact me or check out fedora-devel-java-list or
    > #fedora-java on Freenode.

    I'll have a look when WTP 0.7 (the official 3.1 supporting version) is
    release next week.
    How's the FC4 update to Eclipse 3.1 coming along?

    > switch). Another way of doing things is to just download, say, Sun's stuff
    > as a .tar.gz (or zip? I can't remember how they distribute it), expand it
    > somewhere, and run eclipse (from our packages) with the -vm option (ie.
    > eclipse -vm /home/me/sun/j2blah/bin/java).

    That's great. I had no idea you packaged it up so flexible ;)
    Does that mean there are no "hacks" in the Eclipse packages to make it
    run on gcj? (there are a lot of patches in de Eclipse SRPM)
     
    > > If you just want to use Eclipse it's the recommended way since it runs
    > > a lot faster with Sun Java than on gcj. But it would be great if you'd
    > > like to test Eclipse/gcj.
    > I appreciate the shout-outs for testing however, I don't really know if
    > I would say using Sun's stuff is the "recommended" way :) . Well there are

    Well, the Eclipse guys say so:
    http://eclipse.org/eclipse/faq/eclipse-faq.html#users_3
    Maybe you could try to get them to mention gcj as a runtime alternative?

    > some bugs in libgcj for sure, it's come a long way and the speed is not
    > that much worse. Plus, this is gcc 4.0.x which contains the first release
    > of gcj's new Binary Compatible ABI. This release was more concerned with
    > correctness than speed optimizations. I assure you that things will only
    > get better from here :)

    I understand it's slower and it will get better, but for users not
    interested in testing the gcj based version it's hard to justify not
    running it on a JVM that runs about twice as fast.
    (based on my totally unscientific measurements of clocking startup time)
    But thanks for the assurance ;) - I'm really impressed with the FC4
    Java stack and hoping to see gcj becoming a good alternative to the
    Sun JDK.

    Klaasjan

    -- 
    fedora-list mailing list
    fedora-list@redhat.com
    To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
    

  • Next message: Dave Gutteridge: "tcl and tk location on FC4"