Re: libtool, java woes

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

Jeff Sturm wrote:

> 1) Is this a real problem?  I haven't seen anyone else report it

I havn't done any builds lately, unfortunately. I just tried one and it died
in libffi. Maybe I broke something though.

> 3) Is it a good idea long-term to continue this interdependence between
> libstdc++ and libjava?  It is a little unusual in that the other language
> runtimes are independent.

What interdependence? Do you mean libsupc++? Because the java runtime is
implemented (partly) in C++, it seems reasonable for it to depend on part of
the C++ runtime. If it didn't, parts of the C++ runtime would have to be
duplicated in libjava. This would create a dependency between the
C++ compiler itself and libjava. I think that would be much worse! Generally,
changes to libsupc++ shouldn't have any effect on libjava. The recent
problems are just build related afaik.

> 4) Will --enable-threads ever be the default?  As long as the majority of
> users build and test without it, some bugs will go unnoticed.  Java is
> different than the other languages in that it is almost useless without
> threads.

If there is a good reason why threads shouldn't be enabled by default for
other languages, maybe we should turn it on if java is being built (and there
was no explicit --enable-threads). But ideally I would like to see
--enable-threads be the default on platforms that support threads. This
should probibly be done per-target in the top level configure.in.

regards

  [ bryce ]