This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Small example of livelock regression in garbage collector forGCJ3.3 under Win32
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at hotmail dot com>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:53:12 +0100
- Subject: Re: Small example of livelock regression in garbage collector forGCJ3.3 under Win32
- References: <16074.27934.715273.274532@cuddles.redhat.com><SM74YVOKA5YV9XTQO1VOIA3Y2YFCOM.3eca896b@p733><3ECB0D18.8000709@hotmail.com><16075.19193.792072.251418@cuddles.redhat.com><3ECBC4DA.2A135D40@hotmail.com><16075.51664.269422.701640@cuddles.redhat.com><bahulq$hvv$1@main.gmane.org>
Ranjit Mathew writes:
>
> Of course beyond such trivial programs, the whole of libgcj
> will have to be built with these flags for things to be
> consistent.
Yes.
> BTW, these flags get added to "libgcj.spec" - now when I
> build the GCJ cross compiler, I --disable-libgcj (to save
> 1 hour from the build time!) so no such file is created - does
> that mean that the crossed-native GCJ/libgcj that is built
> using this cross compiler will *not* be compiled using
> these flags?
>
> If yes, I need to look at some other way to propagate
> these flags to the GCJ cross-compiler without having to
> build the whole of libgcj.
But you have to rebuild libgcj anyway.
Andrew.