| Summary: | =dev-java/groovy-1.7.10: Version bump | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | ScytheMan <scytheman666> |
| Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Java team <java> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | cricetus |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10242&version=17229 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | 389383 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
ScytheMan
2011-01-20 17:50:27 UTC
1.7.7 released Release Notes 1.7.6 http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10242&version=16749 Release Notes 1.7.7 http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10242&version=17020 To build it, an update to QDox is needed. Will see if I can do it. I've done the Qdox update, so progress is being made here. I'm not trying to hijack this bug, but will a groovy 1.7.10 ebuild be a good base for groovy 1.8.0? I tried to create a simple groovy 1.8 ebuild but got bunches of access violation errors... Bumped for 1.7.10 done for x86; other arches have to wait for keywording on byaccj / qdox. As far as 1.8 is concerned, I have not tested yet, but yes, this new ebuild should be a good base. so if the requested version is in the tree, should we close the bug or change it into a groovy-1.8.2 bump request? :] dev-java/groovy-1.7.10 compiles fine on amd64. I didn't need qdox, cause of -doc. So this is untested. After bug #389383 is fixed, can you rekeyword groovy on amd64 or should I open a new bug for that issue? Closing as 1.8.5 is already in tree with ~amd64 keyword back, so nothing left to do here. |
