This is the mail archive of the java@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: Reducing static binary size [also: -ffunction-sections, and 'where did Adam go?']

From: Adam Megacz <gcj at lists dot megacz dot com>
To: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 20 Feb 2002 14:22:56 -0800
Subject: Re: Reducing static binary size [also: -ffunction-sections, and 'where did Adam go?']
Organization: Myself
References: <1014104684.7611.10.camel@oak.uwyn.office> <87d6z11ioa.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <86y9hodnis.fsf_-_@megacz.com> <878z9oklgj.fsf@creche.redhat.com>


Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
> I'm ok with the idea in principle.  I'm a bit concerned about making
> this change for 3.1, since I don't know what the risks might be.

What's the timetable for 3.1?

  - a

-- 
"In the dream, someone was asking me 'So what you're saying is that
 all your dreams are lucid?' 'Yes,' I replied 'except for this one.'"
                                                         -- epepke@k5

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Reducing static binary size [also: -ffunction-sections, and 'where did Adam go?']
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

References:
- Reducing static binary size
  - From: Geert Bevin
- Re: Reducing static binary size
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: Reducing static binary size [also: -ffunction-sections, and 'where did Adam go?']
  - From: Adam Megacz
- Re: Reducing static binary size [also: -ffunction-sections, and 'where did Adam go?']
  - From: Tom Tromey

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