From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 105220 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2016 15:52:25 -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 105210 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jan 2016 15:52:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=life X-HELO: einhorn.in-berlin.de Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (HELO einhorn.in-berlin.de) (192.109.42.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:52:23 +0000 X-Envelope-From: doko@ubuntu.com Received: from [192.168.178.29] (ip5f5bf74d.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de [95.91.247.77] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id u03FqDiI007904 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 3 Jan 2016 16:52:15 +0100 Subject: Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname To: Andrew Haley , 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> <56892D5F.1050301@redhat.com> Cc: GCJ-patches , "gcc-patches@gnu.org" From: Matthias Klose Message-ID: <568943AC.20108@ubuntu.com> Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:52:00 -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: <56892D5F.1050301@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-q1/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 On 03.01.2016 15:17, Andrew Haley wrote: > 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. No, libgcj versions up to 4.9.3 didn't change the value for releases taken from the same branch. All of 4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.9.3 have the same GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION. But 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 have *different* GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSIONs. > Why change this rule now, at this stage of GCJ's life? This was changed by the change of the version schema, an unintential change for GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION. I want to keep it that way, not change it with every release from the gcc-5 branch. Matthias