This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java 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: libjava "make install" is broken again


On Mar  4, 2002, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:

>>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> writes:
>>> It is certainly wrong for gcj to dynamically link binaries directly
>>> against libgcjgc - which is what is done currently.

Alexandre> This is only wrong if you assume the dynamic linker could resolve
Alexandre> dependencies of shared libraries by itself.  

Alexandre> I agree it would be nice to omit the explicit dependencies
Alexandre> when possible, though, but libtool doesn't know when it's
Alexandre> possible to do so at this time, since it was never regarded
Alexandre> as a sufficiently important problem to deserve attention.

> Actually, in this case libtool doesn't enter the picture.

Well, it would if you used it to link your applications with libgcj.

> The libraries in question are put into libgcj.spec and gcj picks
> them up at link time.

Which is good because it makes it consistent with libtool, and doesn't
force the user to use libtool to link their applications.

OTOH, it means it's not that simple to get rid of the run-time library
dependencies.  We have to not only convert the dependence libraries to
convenience archives, but also remove the dependencies from the libgcj
specs.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer


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