Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>> Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>>>> Why is the libjava directory configured with raw_cxx?
>>>>>
>>>>> Makefile.def:151:target_modules = { module= libjava; raw_cxx=true; };
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem with this is that it keeps the libtool test for dynamic
>>>>> linker characteristics from working properly, due to the undefined
>>>>> reference to __gxx_personality_v0 which is defined in libstdc++.
>>>> We don't want libstdc++ linked in libgcj.
>>>>
>>>> If the libtool test wants libstdc++, then it's up to the libtool test
>>>> to include libstdc++. Nobody else wants it.
>>> It's not libtool that wants it, but gcc, by generating the reference to
>>> __gxx_personality_v0.
>> Well, yes. I don't quite see your point.
>
> It's a generic link test, independent of the language that the compiler
> accepts. It just assumes that the compiler works.
Sure, but a generic link test shouldn't require a directory to be
configured in any special way. That's the core problem here, not
the fact that libgcj is configured with raw_cxx.
Andrew.
