From: Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com>
To: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
Cc: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
GCJ-patches <java-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"gcc-patches@gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56899D44.2040704@ubuntu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E6F45696-F26B-4F26-913E-981EE1A53601@comcast.net>
On 03.01.2016 20:01, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2016, at 9:34 AM, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> On 03.01.2016 17:23, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 03/01/16 15:52, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Because effectively we've done an arithmetic shift left on the GCC version
>>> numbering, I guess? So where we would have had 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.3, we now
>>> have 5.1, 5.2, 5.3?
>>
>> yes, exactly.
>
> But, isnÂ’t there a trunk version of this patch? I mean, the same issue applies to it and gcc 6, gcc 7 and gcc 8, no?
yes, r232040.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-03 22:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-21 14:07 Matthias Klose
2015-04-21 14:11 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-04-21 14:16 ` Matthias Klose
2015-04-21 14:19 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-04-21 14:29 ` Matthias Klose
2015-04-21 14:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-01-02 14:40 ` Matthias Klose
2016-01-02 15:40 ` Andrew Haley
2016-01-02 15:53 ` Matthias Klose
2016-01-02 16:11 ` Andrew Haley
2016-01-03 11:38 ` Matthias Klose
2016-01-03 14:17 ` Andrew Haley
2016-01-03 15:52 ` Matthias Klose
2016-01-03 16:23 ` Andrew Haley
2016-01-03 17:34 ` Matthias Klose
2016-01-03 19:04 ` Mike Stump
2016-01-03 22:14 ` Matthias Klose [this message]
2015-04-21 17:04 ` Andrew Hughes
2015-04-21 17:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-04-21 17:17 ` Andrew Hughes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56899D44.2040704@ubuntu.com \
--to=doko@ubuntu.com \
--cc=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=java-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mikestump@comcast.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).