From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 94233 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2016 14:17:09 -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 94208 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jan 2016 14:17:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=UD:y, UD:x.y, 4.x.y, UD:4.x.y X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 14:17:07 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFF08134BB; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn-116-92.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.92]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u03EH32N019679; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 09:17:04 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname To: Matthias Klose , Jakub Jelinek References: <55365991.4030806@ubuntu.com> <20150421141125.GW1725@tucnak.redhat.com> <55365BB2.4080603@ubuntu.com> <20150421141924.GX1725@tucnak.redhat.com> <55365EE0.8070202@ubuntu.com> <20150421143747.GY1725@tucnak.redhat.com> <5687E158.7000401@ubuntu.com> <5687EF4D.5030304@redhat.com> <5687F269.7030109@ubuntu.com> <5687F698.20106@redhat.com> <56890829.4020601@ubuntu.com> Cc: GCJ-patches , "gcc-patches@gnu.org" From: Andrew Haley Message-ID: <56892D5F.1050301@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 14:17:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56890829.4020601@ubuntu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-q1/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 On 03/01/16 11:38, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 02.01.2016 17:11, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 02/01/16 15:53, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>>> In any case, GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION should be changed to not include __GNUC_MINOR__ >>>>>>> anymore. Maybe for the gcc-5-branch, set it unconditionally to 3 so that it >>>>>>> won't change anymore with future releases from the gcc-5 branch? >>>>> >>>>> That's safe only if Classpath and libgcj are not changed at all. >>> why? >> >> Because of the way that gcj's linkage works. If you change any of the >> vtable/itable indexes your program will crash. > > Right, but this no change compared to the 4.x.y releases. > > This is what I committed to the trunk. > > So what to do with the gcc-5 branch? Apply the same patch to jvm.h, or fix the > minor version to 3? The latter would be compatible at least with the 5.3 release. Neither. If you link a program with libgcj then you need to recompile it when a new version of libgcj comes along. It has always been this way. Why change this rule now, at this stage of GCJ's life? Andrew.