This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: patches to re-direct _Jv_RegisterClass
- To: <tromey at redhat dot com>, "Per Bothner" <per at bothner dot com>
- Subject: Re: patches to re-direct _Jv_RegisterClass
- From: "Anthony Green" <green at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 15:26:10 -0700
- Cc: <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- References: <m2u218owwn.fsf@kelso.bothner.com> <871yocarlq.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <m2n16y4g3v.fsf@kelso.bothner.com> <87lmmh3g6a.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <m2ofrdbqu0.fsf@kelso.bothner.com> <87r8vtsvl5.fsf@creche.redhat.com>
Tom wrote:
> So if I understand correctly this means that it makes sense for us to
> have both .so loading built in to the system class loader as well as a
> SharedLibLoader. In that case I think we'd definitely want your
> SharedLibLoader code.
FYI, I filed a PR against our current scheme recently. I put it against
"libgcj", although most people appear to just be using "java". Is that what
I should have done?
Also, our current scheme uses library names foo-bar-class.so. This is
inconvenient if you need to link against them (-lfoo-bar-class doesn't
work). Should we change these to libfoo-bar-class.so? Or
libgcj-foo-bar-class.so?
AG