--- Comment #1 from smithj at rpath dot com 2005-12-21 02:49 ---
I have this issue as well, but only with x86_64; x86 configures and compiles
fine. x11 and gcc are both built with the same configure options between the
archs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
--- Comment #2 from smithj at rpath dot com 2005-12-21 02:51 ---
oh, and i also get this on 4.0.2, the 4.0 weekly snapshots, and the 4.2
snapshots (sorry, i meant to say that in the first post)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
--- Comment #6 from smithj at rpath dot com 2006-10-16 16:53 ---
if are are using 4.2: http://people.rpath.com/~smithj/gcc-java-nomulti.patch
if 4.1.1: http://tinyurl.com/y37csd
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
--- Comment #8 from smithj at rpath dot com 2006-10-16 18:55 ---
sorry about that. http://people.rpath.com/~smithj/gcc42-java-nomulti.patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
--- Comment #12 from smithj at rpath dot com 2006-10-16 20:03 ---
Be that as it may, there are plenty of cases where multilib is desired, just
not for java. That should be an option.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
--- Comment #14 from smithj at rpath dot com 2006-10-16 20:13 ---
Java multilib is very difficult to bootstrap. For distros which require a clean
bootstrap, yet want multilib support, having it without java is an acceptable
compromise.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #3 from smithj at rpath dot com 2006-02-21 20:30 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2005-08/msg00161.html
however, the proposed fix does not help me
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25026
