This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [Patch, libjava] use -fnon-call-exceptions rather than -fasynchronous-unwind-tables.
- From: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: IainS <developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk>
- Cc: java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:40:15 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch, libjava] use -fnon-call-exceptions rather than -fasynchronous-unwind-tables.
- References: <6533D5F3-D5AE-475F-A309-625BC7ACBF48@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk>
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:30 AM, IainS
<developer@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi
> IIUC, the following should be the 'correct' approach.
> OK for trunk? (with an appropriate changelog, ?of course).
> Iain
That doens't match what the comment says. What is it the correct
approach for?
> Index: libjava/classpath/configure.ac
> ===================================================================
> --- libjava/classpath/configure.ac ? ? ?(revision 163330)
> +++ libjava/classpath/configure.ac ? ? ?(working copy)
> @@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ if test "x${COMPILE_JNI}" = xyes; then
> ? ? dnl CFLAGS that are used for all native code. ?We want to compile
> ? ? dnl everything with unwinder data so that backtrace() will always
> ? ? dnl work.
> - ? ?EXTRA_CFLAGS='-fexceptions -fasynchronous-unwind-tables'
> + ? ?EXTRA_CFLAGS='-fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions'
> ? ? AC_SUBST(EXTRA_CFLAGS)
>
> ? ? dnl Strict warning flags which not every module uses.
>
>