Re: Classpath Merge (1/3): libgcj-import-20100921

[Dr Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew@member.fsf.org>]

On 5 October 2010 09:43, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 28.09.2010 23:23, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> Attached is a merge of GNU Classpath into trunk from the tag
>> libgcj-import-20100921.  This tag was created against revisions as of
>> 2010-06-01 to avoid the whitespace changes on the 3rd.  My intention
>> is to post separate whitespace fixes for gcj and then a second merge
>> containing changes after this change to Classpath.  This merge however
>> contains most of the changes that have lingered in Classpath for a
>> long time since the merge for 4.4.
>>
>> This took longer than expected, mainly due to the presence of
>> generated autotools files in the gcj tree which require regeneration
>> with specific versions.  gcj seems to have decided to use libtool
>> 2.2.7a, which doesn't exist as a release on
>> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libtool/ and I ran into conflicts with macros
>> from the GNU Classpath import which used the system 2.2.10 install.
>> In the end, the solution was to remove the Classpath copy from the m4
>> directory, which caused the 2.2.7a macros in
>> the top-level config directory to be used.
>
> CCing Ralf for the auto*/libtool stuff. Maybe it's worth documenting the
> missing libtool bits/versions in libjava/HACKING?
>

Most of the problem was just working out what was going on, but yes
I'll certainly document it to save later head-scratching.

>> The merge has been tested with both java-maintainer mode and
>> non-java-maintainer mode builds, and the Classpath changes have been
>> committed to the classpath tree.
>
> I assume that the correct ecj.jar from sourceware.org:/pub/java was used to
> generate the class files.

Yes AFAIK - it depends what you mean by 'the correct ecj.jar'.  The
only changed class files are ones with changed source files so it
presumably generated identical class files for the unchanged source
files.

>
> The generated auto* files are usually not included in the diff for the
> review.
>

Then they shouldn't be in svn :-)

>> Ok for trunk?
>
> Looks okay to me, but I cannot approve it.
>
>  Matthias
>

Thanks for checking it over anyway,

Cheers,
-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8