From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-10-08 18:33:17
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 14:33 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-10-08 21:47:08
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 16:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-10-08 21:49:20
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) >Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 16:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-10-08 22:21:53
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 14:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by psmith You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 18:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 17:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-10-08 22:24:32
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 14:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by psmith You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 18:24 Message: I guess I should be clear: I assumed that the configure script would probe for Java if I didn't specify either --with-java or --without-java on the configure line, since that's what configure scripts usually do for optional packages. So, I explicitly added the --without-java to ensure that, in my cross-compiled environment, the configure script wouldn't try to find Java. And thus I ran into this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 18:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 17:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-04-20 16:22:26
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 11:22 Message: From http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#AC_005fARG_005fWITH, there is an example of a '--with-<pkg>' option where the default is "no". So, while it may not be typical, it's certainly allowable. But with that said, I think the help text for our '--with-java' option should make it clear that our default is "no". Additionally, there's the bug you pointed out where if the user passes "--without-java", "--with-java=no", "--with-java" or "--with-java=yes", our configure tries to find jvmti.h and jvmpi.h headers using a path of either "no/include" or "yes/include". I will fix both of these issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:24 Message: I guess I should be clear: I assumed that the configure script would probe for Java if I didn't specify either --with-java or --without-java on the configure line, since that's what configure scripts usually do for optional packages. So, I explicitly added the --without-java to ensure that, in my cross-compiled environment, the configure script wouldn't try to find Java. And thus I ran into this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 16:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-04-20 19:20:52
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 14:20 Message: Paul, I posted a patch to the oprofile mailing list and asked our JIT support maintainer (Daniel Hansel) to review it. Could you review the patch, too, please? I'll attach it to this bug for convenience, but if you have review comments, I'd prefer you make them on the mailing list if possible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 11:22 Message: From http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#AC_005fARG_005fWITH, there is an example of a '--with-<pkg>' option where the default is "no". So, while it may not be typical, it's certainly allowable. But with that said, I think the help text for our '--with-java' option should make it clear that our default is "no". Additionally, there's the bug you pointed out where if the user passes "--without-java", "--with-java=no", "--with-java" or "--with-java=yes", our configure tries to find jvmti.h and jvmpi.h headers using a path of either "no/include" or "yes/include". I will fix both of these issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:24 Message: I guess I should be clear: I assumed that the configure script would probe for Java if I didn't specify either --with-java or --without-java on the configure line, since that's what configure scripts usually do for optional packages. So, I explicitly added the --without-java to ensure that, in my cross-compiled environment, the configure script wouldn't try to find Java. And thus I ran into this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 16:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-05-17 12:08:28
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-05-17 07:08 Message: The attached patch was reviewed and approved by Daniel Hansel (our oprofile "JIT support maintainer"). I am marking this bug as "FIXED". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 14:20 Message: Paul, I posted a patch to the oprofile mailing list and asked our JIT support maintainer (Daniel Hansel) to review it. Could you review the patch, too, please? I'll attach it to this bug for convenience, but if you have review comments, I'd prefer you make them on the mailing list if possible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 11:22 Message: From http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#AC_005fARG_005fWITH, there is an example of a '--with-<pkg>' option where the default is "no". So, while it may not be typical, it's certainly allowable. But with that said, I think the help text for our '--with-java' option should make it clear that our default is "no". Additionally, there's the bug you pointed out where if the user passes "--without-java", "--with-java=no", "--with-java" or "--with-java=yes", our configure tries to find jvmti.h and jvmpi.h headers using a path of either "no/include" or "yes/include". I will fix both of these issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:24 Message: I guess I should be clear: I assumed that the configure script would probe for Java if I didn't specify either --with-java or --without-java on the configure line, since that's what configure scripts usually do for optional packages. So, I explicitly added the --without-java to ensure that, in my cross-compiled environment, the configure script wouldn't try to find Java. And thus I ran into this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 17:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 16:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2012-08-07 18:01:32
|
Bugs item #2153620, was opened at 2008-10-08 11:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: configure fails to handle --without-java correctly Initial Comment: The autotools docs say that using "--without-<pkg>" will disable that package. However, in oprofile if I use --without-java then it assumes that JAVA_HOME=no (because when you say --without-java it sets the $withval to "no") and proceeds to assume you DO want java support. The configure.in script needs to check to see if $withval is "no" and, if so, NOT enable java support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-08-07 11:01 Message: This should have been closed after 0.9.7 was released on Aug 12, 2011. Closing now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-05-17 05:08 Message: The attached patch was reviewed and approved by Daniel Hansel (our oprofile "JIT support maintainer"). I am marking this bug as "FIXED". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 12:20 Message: Paul, I posted a patch to the oprofile mailing list and asked our JIT support maintainer (Daniel Hansel) to review it. Could you review the patch, too, please? I'll attach it to this bug for convenience, but if you have review comments, I'd prefer you make them on the mailing list if possible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-04-20 09:22 Message: From http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#AC_005fARG_005fWITH, there is an example of a '--with-<pkg>' option where the default is "no". So, while it may not be typical, it's certainly allowable. But with that said, I think the help text for our '--with-java' option should make it clear that our default is "no". Additionally, there's the bug you pointed out where if the user passes "--without-java", "--with-java=no", "--with-java" or "--with-java=yes", our configure tries to find jvmti.h and jvmpi.h headers using a path of either "no/include" or "yes/include". I will fix both of these issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 15:24 Message: I guess I should be clear: I assumed that the configure script would probe for Java if I didn't specify either --with-java or --without-java on the configure line, since that's what configure scripts usually do for optional packages. So, I explicitly added the --without-java to ensure that, in my cross-compiled environment, the configure script wouldn't try to find Java. And thus I ran into this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Paul D. Smith (psmith) Date: 2008-10-08 15:21 Message: It's not innocuous if you're trying to cross-compile oprofile (which I am), because the tests for Java cannot succeed in a cross-compiled environment (which, I suppose, is a different bug) and the configure fails if you specify --without-java: checking for kernel OProfile support... yes checking for "no/include/jvmti.h"... configure: error: cannot check for file existence when cross compiling While if you just don't mention java at all on the configure line it does not fail. Of course one option is, as you suggest, to change the behavior of configure. However, thousands of software packages have obeyed this rule for years, so much that it's very rare that someone building the code will ever bother to read the INSTALL file or the --help output carefully and realize that this particular package does things a different way. My personal preference would be to fix the configure script to behave according to well-recognized norms, but since I'm not (at this time) providing a patch it remains that: my personal preference :-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2008-10-08 14:47 Message: The situation you describe seems pretty innocuous to me. The configure script checks for the existence of "no/include/jvm[t|p]i.h"; if not found, a message is displayed and configure continues. Nothing extraneous or bogus is put into makefiles, and the project builds just fine. Perhaps the best solution is to remove the "--without-PACKAGE" help text from configure.in, since this option is not supported for any of the features for which we have the '--with-PACKAGE' option (not just java). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=2153620&group_id=16191 |