--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-23 17:59 ---
Fix checked in a while ago.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-05 17:09 ---
Probably a dup of PR 9463.
What locale are you using? How is the umlaut encoded in the directory name?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-22 19:51 ---
Treelang has been removed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-27 18:36 ---
I'll handle this when I remove fastjar.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-29 21:45 ---
This was fixed by the patch for PR 26901.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 18:10 ---
It isn't clear what exception we ought to throw here.
What is happening is that we've found a .class file for a class
we're searching for, but libgcj is not configured to properly
han
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-05 15:05 ---
Subject: Bug 27294
Author: tromey
Date: Fri May 5 15:05:20 2006
New Revision: 113554
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113554
Log:
PR libgcj/27294:
* j
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-05 15:06 ---
Now we print something nicer:
opsy. gij t
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.VirtualMachineError: found class file for
class t, but no interpreter configured in this libgcj
--
tromey at gcc dot g
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||28067
nThis||
http
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||28067
nThis||
http
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||28067
nThis||
http
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||28067
nThis||
http
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|28067 |
nThis||
BugsThisDependsOn
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|28067 |
nThis||
BugsThisDependsOn
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|28067 |
nThis||
BugsThisDependsOn
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|28067 |
nThis||
BugsThisDependsOn
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-07 16:38 ---
Is this fixed by that commit?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28312
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fitzsim at redhat dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-17 01:24 ---
For a simple example it does not do this:
opsy. gcj -O2 -fPIC -fjni -findirect-dispatch -o H --main=HelloWorld
HelloWorld.class
opsy. eu-readelf -d H|fgrep lib
NEEDEDShared library: [libgcc_s.so.1
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-22 23:34 ---
Bryce pointed out that we need to deal with the primitive class
objects somehow. Otherwise code like 'new int[5]' will pull in
libgcj.so.
I'll send a patch to the java-patches list.
Could you try
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-23 16:58 ---
There's some kind of skew here... I took the code on the trunk
from the RH 4.1 branch, not from the FC RPM.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28698
--- You are receiving this mail be
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-31 17:24 ---
Subject: Bug 28698
Author: tromey
Date: Thu Aug 31 17:23:57 2006
New Revision: 116603
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116603
Log:
PR libgcj/28698:
* lib
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-31 22:00 ---
Subject: Bug 28698
Author: tromey
Date: Thu Aug 31 22:00:06 2006
New Revision: 116607
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116607
Log:
PR libgcj/28698:
* lib
--- Comment #10 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-01 16:16 ---
Subject: Bug 28698
Author: tromey
Date: Fri Sep 1 16:16:15 2006
New Revision: 116631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116631
Log:
PR libgcj/28698:
* lib
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-23 22:33 ---
Note that -d doesn't do anything when compiling to object.
However, adding -C doesn't help either.
A simple workaround is to add -Isrc.
This is fixed on the gcj-eclipse branch, I marked this PR as
depen
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 17:30 ---
Subject: Bug 29203
Author: tromey
Date: Mon Sep 25 17:30:21 2006
New Revision: 117197
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=117197
Log:
2006-09-25 Mark Wielaard <[EMAI
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-25 17:33 ---
Subject: Bug 29203
Author: tromey
Date: Mon Sep 25 17:33:20 2006
New Revision: 117199
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=117199
Log:
2006-09-25 Mark Wielaard <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-28 17:28 ---
Fix checked in.
Also in GCC 4.2.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22
18:00 ---
No feedback in nearly a year.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-23
14:36 ---
This still seems quite high:
# of unexpected failures91
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20908
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You reported the bug, or are
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02
21:46 ---
About comment #6 - it doesn't seem to me that this patch could have affected
the setting of BACKTRACESPEC. The most recent change there was on
01-Jun-05; see libjava/configure.host (via cvs annotate
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-06 19:34 ---
What is the status of this?
It looks like Bug 24348 might be fixed.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-06 19:39 ---
The fix was checked in a while ago.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-08 17:26 ---
Fix checked in.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #10 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 20:43 ---
All gcj front end bugs have been fixed by the gcj-eclipse branch merge.
I'm mass-closing the affected PRs.
If you believe one of these was closed in error, please reopen it
with a note explaining why.
T
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 20:44 ---
All gcj front end bugs have been fixed by the gcj-eclipse branch merge.
I'm mass-closing the affected PRs.
If you believe one of these was closed in error, please reopen it
with a note explaining why.
T
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 20:47 ---
All gcj front end bugs have been fixed by the gcj-eclipse branch merge.
I'm mass-closing the affected PRs.
If you believe one of these was closed in error, please reopen it
with a note explaining why.
T
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 20:48 ---
All gcj front end bugs have been fixed by the gcj-eclipse branch merge.
I'm mass-closing the affected PRs.
If you believe one of these was closed in error, please reopen it
with a note explaining why.
T
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 20:45 ---
All gcj front end bugs have been fixed by the gcj-eclipse branch merge.
I'm mass-closing the affected PRs.
If you believe one of these was closed in error, please reopen it
with a note explaining why.
T
--
Bug 22507 depends on bug 28067, which changed state.
Bug 28067 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracking bug for ecj fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28067
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 2499 depends on bug 28067, which changed state.
Bug 28067 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracking bug for ecj fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28067
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--
Bug 29194 depends on bug 28067, which changed state.
Bug 28067 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracking bug for ecj fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28067
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 8923 depends on bug 28067, which changed state.
Bug 28067 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracking bug for ecj fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28067
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--
Bug 10581 depends on bug 28067, which changed state.
Bug 28067 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracking bug for ecj fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28067
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 02:17 ---
Fixed by the gcj-eclipse merge.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 20:57 ---
Sounds like it is fixed then.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-07 22:24 ---
Confirmed. No one has written this class yet.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-23 16:11 ---
I have a fix I'm testing.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-07 17:38 ---
Fixed via classpath import.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-05
19:51 ---
What's the status of this PR?
The corresponding Debian bug has been closed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10304
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on t
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:48 ---
Testing a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:56 ---
In the upstream PR, a real deadlock is mentioned.
The backtrace shows the finalizer thread blocking.
Probably what is happening is that one thread is
spinning while looking for an empty slot in the string
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
00:37 ---
One more note -- the test case will loop infinitely
even when the intern() bug has been fixed, since every
'char' value is <= \u
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21703
--
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
01:06 ---
I've checked in a patch on the 4.0 branch.
I will put it on the trunk when it emerges from its current
slushy state; I am leaving the PR open until then.
I'm not planning to put this on the 3.4 b
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
01:13 ---
The jar file is actually missing the files that gcj says it cannot find.
And, these classes are definitely referred to by other classes in the jar.
So, that is a problem with the jar file, at least for the C
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-25
15:24 ---
Fix checked in.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-16
01:38 ---
This is actually how jar is supposed to work.
It is silly, but afaics the JDK jar works the same way.
I'm closing the PR for this reason.
FWIW I had to add another argument and I get this:
opsy. jar
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11443
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-06
16:18 ---
I don't think this is really a gcc bug.
If you want to debug your java code, you s
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10632
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-06
16:22 ---
Java only requires exact FP results for
strictfp classes and methods. So you would
have
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-24
20:56 ---
I believe this was fixed by this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01702.html
I haven't checked to verify it however.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
61 matches
Mail list logo
