This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Java Patches: -fno-org-xml-sax and -fno-org-w3c-dom
- From: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>
- To: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
- Cc: java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 01 Dec 2002 10:30:10 -0800
- Subject: Re: Java Patches: -fno-org-xml-sax and -fno-org-w3c-dom
- References: <1038718968.31616.23.camel@escape> <3DEA4FE3.3010801@bothner.com>
On Sun, 2002-12-01 at 10:07, Per Bothner wrote:
> That makes sense, though it might make sense to put them in
> a single shared library.
I like these two libraries, because if you don't add them at link time
libgcj will still be able to find them at runtime via Class.forName().
> This is not OK, IMO. It's a bad precedent. We can't keep
> adding random flags for specific packages.
Oh - I thought you had recently agreed to something like this on the
java list.
> First, note it's not just linking, but also compiling - i.e.
> controlling which jar(s) that the compiler searches. By
> default the compiler should search the jars in the extension
> directory.
gcj does search the extension directory.
> Secondly, I think the choice as to which shared library to
> link should parallel which jars are compiled against. If the
> compilation classpath options causes the standard sax/dom jars
> (in the standard extension directory) to be searched, then the
> linker should link against the standard sax/dom shared library(ies),
> and only then.
Well, what would you propose then? Newer versions of Xerces (and
Tomcat, Xalan, etc) are unbuildable right now, so I would like to fix
this quickly. Perhaps the simplest thing is to do what Jeff suggests
and never link these by default.
AG