This is the mail archive of the java-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
Cc: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 29 Nov 2004 10:31:15 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets
References: <200411282233.03282.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr><m3u0r8si9d.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <41AB5CDA.3070208@avtrex.com>
Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com

>>>>> "David" == David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com> writes:

David> Isn't libgcj always compiled with gcc/g++/gcj?  In all stage
David> one builds (or cross-compiles) that I have done, that is the
David> case.  I don't see why the host compiler would ever be used for
David> compiling libgcj.

David> Am I missing something?

I think the problem is that, while GCC is C99, the target platform's
headers may not be.  So, intptr_t may not be defined.  As far as I
know, GCC itself doesn't ship a header which defines this.

Tom

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets
  - From: Eric Botcazou

References:
- [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: [PATCH] Fix build failure on non-C99 targets
  - From: David Daney

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