Re: Solaris redux

[Bryce McKinlay <bryce at albatross dot co dot nz>]

Jeff Sturm wrote:

> I'm looking over Bryce's patch:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2001-01/msg00594.html
>
> Any reason this hasn't been committed?  It seems like a reasonable
> idea to apply patches that will make libgcj more portable (and more
> debuggable).

It has merits as a cleanup patch too, so I think I'll check it in eventually
(I have quite a backlog of bits and peices to cleanup/finish and check in at
the moment). I'm not sure it really helps this case though - if the
C++ static constructors arn't executing however, what about GCJ's class
registration functions?

> One problem with shared library initialization is that libgcj.so isn't
> linked with libgcjgc.so and libzgcj.so.  I fixed this in my local tree.
> It didn't help the Solaris build, but might explain why sprof doesn't work
> on libgcj.so.

Good idea. I'll try that. It also seems conceptually better to have the
dependencies in libgcj.so itself, rather than relying on the application to
link them in, given that the application does not use either directly.

regards

  [ bryce ]