Small example of livelock regression in garbage collector forGCJ 3.3 under W
Thu May 22 12:23:00 GMT 2003
> > I meant not having to build libgcj while building the cross compiler - for
> > the crossed native compiler, I realise that I need to rebuild libgcj.
> I'm not sure I understand what the cross compiler is for. If it's
> only to build a native compiler surely you don't need C++ or Java,
> just a C compiler. You might as well disable all other languages.
I build a crossed-native (build=linux, host=target=win32) GCJ
for Win32 using a cross (build=host=linux, target=win32) GCJ.
This two phase process is *much faster* and far more reliable
than a purely native Win32 build - more details on this process
The cross GCJ is used to build the libgcj for the
crossed-native GCJ (as it can't build the libgcj itself).
So "java" is needed and therefore "c++" and thus "c" - I
configure only with "--enable-languages=c,c++,java".
> > If I need to affect the crossed-native compiler's libgcj, is there any way I
> > can do this *without* having to build the cross compiler's libgcj as well?
> Well, I don't know what the crossed-native compiler is for, so I can't
The crossed-native GCJ is for all practical purposes as good
as a native GCJ for Win32!
In a bootstrapping native build, I can understand that the
configure.host changes can possibly affect the libgcj
build, but since I am using a cross GCJ (that doesn't have its
own libgcj or libgcj.spec) to build the final libgj, I am
not so sure the changes will be effective.
I'll investigate this issue a bit more.
Ranjit Mathew Email: rmathew AT hotmail DOT com
Bangalore, INDIA. Web: http://ranjitmathew.tripod.com/
More information about the Java