Is gcj dead?

[Mathieu Malaterre]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
> Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> Yuri wrote:
>>>>>> Last news in http://gcc.gnu.org/java/ are dated March 2007.
>>>>> Yes, we should update that.  There hasn't been a lot of  new gcj development,
>>>>> but it is maintained.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also I submitted few PRs a month ago and there is no response at all.
>>>>> Which ones?
>>>> How about this one:
>>>>
>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40816
>>> I am still rather nervous about that one, as it's an ABI change.
>>
>> Point taken.
>> In the long term this will prevent compilation of package such as VTK
>> on debian on arch such as HPPA.
>
> Really?  That's all rather amazing.  Is there no simple workaround?

Compilation error can be found here:

http://www.vtk.org/pipermail/vtk-developers/2009-June/006110.html

And source:

http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/Graphics/vtkJVMManager.h?view=annotate

I really do not see how I can work around that. Simply removing one of
the multiple signature is not a solution IMHO.

Thanks,
-- 
Mathieu