From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90004 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2015 16:26:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 89983 invoked by uid 89); 20 Aug 2015 16:26:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx6-phx2.redhat.com Received: from mx6-phx2.redhat.com (HELO mx6-phx2.redhat.com) (209.132.183.39) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 16:26:05 +0000 Received: from zmail17.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (zmail17.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.83.19]) by mx6-phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t7KGQ4sO013774; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:26:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 16:26:00 -0000 From: Andrew Hughes To: Andrew Haley Cc: Jeff Law , Matthias Klose , Tom Tromey , Uros Bizjak , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, java-patches@gcc.gnu.org Message-ID: <1969327084.13363261.1440087964188.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <55D5FB79.5020004@redhat.com> References: <55D58ED0.1020402@ubuntu.com> <55D5909B.3080207@redhat.com> <401143105.13318272.1440082676204.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <55D5F1C8.7060003@redhat.com> <55D5F681.5060809@redhat.com> <1092027746.13351972.1440086614051.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <55D5FB79.5020004@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH, libjava/classpath]: Fix overriding recipe for target 'gjdoc' build warning MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-q3/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 ----- Original Message ----- > On 08/20/2015 05:03 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > The issue is that we're still supporting a version of OpenJDK/IcedTea where > > there is no previous version (6). > > Surely OpenJDK 6 can build itself. And in the unlikely event of an > entirely new architecture which has No OpenJDK we'd have to grab an > old GCJ and build it with that. > > If GCJ is included as part of GCC but is not maintained and tested, it > will soon rot. That isn't an option IMO. > > Andrew. > I agree and I'm not saying keep it forever. Just give us a little time to adapt to its removal by obsoleting now and removing it in the next release cycle, rather than deleting it now six months before a release. It's not just "entirely new architecture"s that have no OpenJDK, but any system which, for whatever reason, doesn't have a binary available. GCC follows this process of obsolescence then removal for ports (e.g. [0]). I don't see why a language port should be any different. [0] https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: ed25519/35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07