This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:35:35 -0600
- Subject: Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTinN2srdxEJzeeNnofjbdLNaYZTxUW2TJv6==ZYG@mail.gmail.com> <4CCF8804.email@example.com>
>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Law <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Jeff> Building libjava (at least for me) is primarily painful due to 2 files
Jeff> (the names escape me) and the rather poor coarse level parallelism
Jeff> (can't build the 32bit and 64bit multilibs in parallel for example).
Jeff> Has anyone looked at fixing the build machinery for libjava to make it
Jeff> more sensible?
Nope. AFAIK it is already as parallelized as possible, but it has been
a while since I looked at it.
I thought the really bad file (HTML_401F.java, IIRC) had some functions
split up so that it wasn't so evil any more.
The multilib thing sounds like a top-level problem of some kind.
At least, I don't recall that libjava does anything special here.