This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
RE: testsuite problems on darwin was: [patch] HAVE_LC_MESSAGES fornatSystem.cc
- From: "Boehm, Hans" <hans_boehm at hp dot com>
- To: "'Jeff Sturm'" <jsturm at one-point dot com>, Andreas Tobler <toa at pop dot agri dot ch>
- Cc: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>, tromey at redhat dot com, GCC-Java <java at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:12:27 -0800
- Subject: RE: testsuite problems on darwin was: [patch] HAVE_LC_MESSAGES fornatSystem.cc
The read() wrapper is gone in my current tree anyway. (I actually left it
inside a #if 0 as an example for anyone who wants to wrap system calls in
this way.) It seemed to be causing more harm than good. I believe the plan
for gcj is to no longer protect pointer-free pages when it can be avoided,
to enable incremental GC only if it can be avoided, and to avoid making
system calls from libgcj that write to the pointer-containing heap. The
interface to support that is in the latest GC alpha releases. In this was
gcj should never need the wrappers.
Hans
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Sturm [mailto:jsturm@one-point.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 9:52 AM
> To: Andreas Tobler
> Cc: Stan Shebs; tromey@redhat.com; GCC-Java
> Subject: Re: testsuite problems on darwin was: [patch]
> HAVE_LC_MESSAGES
> fornatSystem.cc
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> > In other words, I have to get rid of the read() in
> boehm-gc/os_dep.c for darwin?.
> > A first look into it showed me it's quite complicated to understand.
>
> Undefining MPROTECT_VDB should do, provided you don't need or want
> incremental collection.
>
> Jeff
>