PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default

[H.J. Lu]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/18/2010 09:23 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> On 11/11/2010 3:20 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>>>> Currently we build the Java frontend and libjava by default.  At the GCC
>>>> Summit we raised the question of whether should turn this off, thus only
>>>> building it when java is explicitly selected at configure time with
>>>> --enable-languages.  Among the people at the summit, there was general
>>>> support for this, and nobody was opposed to it.
>>
>>> I count 33 messages on the topic and it is clear that there is no
>>> consensus.  I am withdrawing this proposed patch.
>>
>> I think that's a mistake.
>>
>> The arguments raised, such as the fact that Java tests non-call
>> exceptions, are just not persuasive to me.  If we need tests for a
>> middle-end feature, we can almost always write them in C or C++.
>>
>> The bottom line is that libjava takes a very long time to build and that
>> the marginal benefit is out of proportion to the cost.  Building
>> zillions of Java class files cannot be the best way to test non-call
>> exceptions.  If we have no tests for non-call exceptions in the C/C++
>> testsuite, perhaps you (Ian) could write a few in C++?
>>
>> Ian, I was prepared to approve the patch.  I certainly won't do that if
>> you now think it's a bad idea, but if you still think it's a good idea,
>> I think you should go for it.
>>
>> I think that it should still be the case that if you break Java, and one
>> of the Java testers catches you, you still have an obligation to fix the
>> problem.  All we're changing is whether you build Java by default;
>> nothing else.
>
> I made it pretty clear that as long as the autotesters build java, and I
> get emails when something breaks, and you have the obligation to fix
> whatever broke, I have no objection.
>
> Andrew.
>

FYI, this testsuite regression is only seen in libjava:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46515


-- 
H.J.