On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > "Joseph S. Myers" <jos...@codesourcery.com> writes: > >> Why do a great many targets disable libgcj by default in the toplevel >> configure.ac? > > I believe that it's just a hack: libgcj doesn't build on the target, but > gcc/java does. Disabling libgcj lets the gcc configure/make complete in > a natural way. > > unsupported_languages is a clearly superior approach, but it postdates > many of the cases in which libgcj is added to noconfigdirs.
In some cases, like for x86_64-w64-mingw (Win64), we can build gcj fine, and we intend to support a java compiler. However, at present, we cannot build libgcj because the boehm-gc in the tree is several years out of date. Once Hans, or someone else with enough skill, updates that, we can turn on libgcj. Until then, we'd like to make sure that building the compiler doesn't break. Given how out of date certain dependencies are for libgcj, I would not be surprised if other targets suffered the same fate.
