From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-113830-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 18087 invoked by alias); 5 May 2005 21:08:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17825 invoked from network); 5 May 2005 21:08:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net) (199.185.220.220)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 May 2005 21:08:43 -0000
Received: from idle.eu.org ([207.81.20.181])
          by priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.04.04 201-2131-118-104-20050224) with ESMTP
          id <20050505210842.GMPQ14016.priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net@idle.eu.org>;
          Thu, 5 May 2005 15:08:42 -0600
Received: from p4.lan (p4.lan [192.168.1.2])
	by idle.eu.org (8.12.8/8.11.0) with ESMTP id j45L8baL006563;
	Thu, 5 May 2005 14:08:38 -0700
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 21:13:00 -0000
From: Rutger Ovidius <r_ovidius@eml.cc>
Reply-To: Rutger Ovidius <r_ovidius@eml.cc>
Message-ID: <588985473.20050505140822@eml.cc>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
CC: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>,
   Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>, <tromey@redhat.com>,
   Ranjit Mathew <rmathew@gmail.com>, GCC <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
   GCJ <java@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: GCC 4.1: Buildable on GHz machines only?
In-Reply-To: <20050505201605.GB31978@redhat.com>
References: <20050427025707.GA20956@nevyn.them.org>
 <20050427053042.GA1317@redhat.com> <426F2611.7060801@3am-software.com>
 <426FD0DC.50601@codesourcery.com> <427962FC.5000305@bothner.com>
 <4279C184.6050909@gmail.com> <m3oebpu47j.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
 <427A3F08.4000109@bothner.com>
 <17018.16701.719032.745892@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
 <or7jidh2df.fsf@livre.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
 <20050505201605.GB31978@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00268.txt.bz2

Thursday, May 5, 2005, 1:16:05 PM, you wrote:

RH> On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:57:48PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> The savings of creating static libraries would be small if we
>> refrained from building non-PIC object files.

RH> But still largely useless.  Who in their right mind is going to
RH> use an 83MB static library when a shared library is available.

Everyone on win32 builds libgcj static, and probably wants to keep it
that way if they plan to distribute their apps.

What would be the point of distributing a giant shared library with
every application compiled with gcj, especially when awt/swing only
hook into gtk?

I don't think libgcj.dll will ever be standard on any distribution of
win32, yet the many advantages of compiling java code to fast, native
executables apply on this platform.