This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Java project.
[PATCH] Cleanup patches to build libgcj on x86/linux
- To: java-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Subject: [PATCH] Cleanup patches to build libgcj on x86/linux
- From: Alexandre Petit-Bianco <apbianco at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:41:23 -0700
- Reply-to: apbianco at redhat dot com
I'm trying to build the latest and greatest (compiler and runtime) and
I found that a patch like the one below was necessary. What do you
guys think?
./A
2000-07-26 Alexandre Petit-Bianco <apbianco@cygnus.com>
* jni.cc (_Jv_JNIMethod::call): Type the cast of the second
argument to `ffi_raw_call' changed to match prototype.
* interpret.cc (_Jv_InterpMethod::continue1): Likewise.
Index: libjava/interpret.cc
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/java/libgcj/libjava/interpret.cc,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -p -r1.17 interpret.cc
--- interpret.cc 2000/05/31 22:49:18 1.17
+++ interpret.cc 2000/07/26 06:38:30
@@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ void _Jv_InterpMethod::continue1 (_Jv_In
#if FFI_NATIVE_RAW_API
/* We assume that this is only implemented if it's correct */
/* to use it here. On a 64 bit machine, it never is. */
- ffi_raw_call (cif, fun, (void*)&rvalue, raw);
+ ffi_raw_call (cif, (void (*)()) fun, (void*)&rvalue, raw);
#else
ffi_java_raw_call (cif, fun, (void*)&rvalue, raw);
#endif
Index: libjava/jni.cc
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/java/libgcj/libjava/jni.cc,v
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -p -r1.31 jni.cc
--- jni.cc 2000/04/20 17:39:30 1.31
+++ jni.cc 2000/07/26 06:38:34
@@ -1784,7 +1784,7 @@ _Jv_JNIMethod::call (ffi_cif *, void *re
memcpy (&real_args[offset], args, _this->args_raw_size);
// The actual call to the JNI function.
- ffi_raw_call (&_this->jni_cif, (void (*) (...)) _this->function,
+ ffi_raw_call (&_this->jni_cif, (void (*) ()) _this->function,
ret, real_args);
_Jv_JNI_PopSystemFrame (env);