This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [MinGW] PR target/19970: Java unnecessarily disabled for MinGW in top-level configure


Nathanael Nerode schrieb:
> David Ayers wrote:
> 
>>>Yet I fail to understand the need for --enable/disable-libgcj if it is
>>>merely being used to enable/disable java.  Why isn't that being done via
>>>language variable?
> 
> 
> Probably historical.  :-)
> 
> Perhaps you could work up a patch for the top level which does the
> following:
> 
> (1) removes --enable/disable-libgcj
> (2) changes the list of default languages to not include Java for the
> former targets which defaulted to --disable-libgcj, and to include Java
> for the other targets.  (While you're at it you could enable Java by
> default on MinGW.)
> (3) determines whether or not to build the libgcj subdir et al. based on
> the presence of Java in the language list
> 
> 
> This would simplify the gunk at the toplevel quite a bit.  Can anyone
> think of a reason not to do this?

Before I continue working on this for 4.3, I would like to have a signal
from the java maintainers, if they actually agree with this approach in
the light of:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-06/msg00795.html

in which there seems to be a reluctance to make building the runtime
dependant on building the front-end.

Cheers,
David


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]