From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2447 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2009 09:43:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 2423 invoked by uid 48); 27 Oct 2009 09:43:21 -0000 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20091027094321.2422.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug java/40816] error: 'jvariant::jvariant(jbyte)' cannot be overloaded In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: java-prs@gcc.gnu.org From: "mathieu dot malaterre at gmail dot com" Mailing-List: contact java-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-q4/txt/msg00036.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #1 from mathieu dot malaterre at gmail dot com 2009-10-27 09:43 ------- Copying from the mailing list: from Andrew Haley to Tom Tromey cc java@gcc.gnu.org date Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM subject Re: Is gcj dead? mailing list Filter messages from this mailing list unsubscribe Unsubscribe from this mailing-list hide details Oct 19 (8 days ago) - Show quoted text - Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>> Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>>>> Yuri wrote: >>>>>>> Last news in http://gcc.gnu.org/java/ are dated March 2007. >>>>>> Yes, we should update that. There hasn't been a lot of new gcj development, >>>>>> but it is maintained. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Also I submitted few PRs a month ago and there is no response at all. >>>>>> Which ones? >>>>> How about this one: >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40816 >>>> I am still rather nervous about that one, as it's an ABI change. >>> Point taken. >>> In the long term this will prevent compilation of package such as VTK >>> on debian on arch such as HPPA. >> Really? That's all rather amazing. Is there no simple workaround? > > Compilation error can be found here: > > http://www.vtk.org/pipermail/vtk-developers/2009-June/006110.html > > And source: > > http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/Graphics/vtkJVMManager.h?view=annotate > > I really do not see how I can work around that. Simply removing one of > the multiple signature is not a solution IMHO. Yes, I see what's going on. To Tom Tromey: This is an ABI change, but AFAICS the only time it makes a difference is where it's already broken. I'm tempted to make the change now. Andrew. -- mathieu dot malaterre at gmail dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mathieu dot malaterre at | |gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40816