From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21328 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 2010 15:17:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 21320 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Mar 2010 15:17:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-fx0-f210.google.com (HELO mail-fx0-f210.google.com) (209.85.220.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:17:35 +0000 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so7330881fxm.16 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:17:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: gnu_andrew@member.fsf.org Received: by 10.239.186.193 with SMTP id i1mr487042hbh.133.1268061453035; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:17:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100308143630.GM4307@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <4B894D27.5080804@ubuntu.com> <17c6771e1003011154l556ea301h92e54ff2d457eb6a@mail.gmail.com> <4B94E374.9090700@ubuntu.com> <17c6771e1003080434r30405864v4e362752bc146ef3@mail.gmail.com> <4B94F065.60607@ubuntu.com> <17c6771e1003080444o3991c1bck4ce0b234c684878e@mail.gmail.com> <20100308143630.GM4307@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <17c6771e1003080717p4bbae5cege27c47f1153b5cd9@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: icedtea6 build failures on alpha and armel using gcj From: Andrew John Hughes To: Lennart Sorensen Cc: Matthias Klose , GCC Java , debian-arm@lists.debian.org, debian-alpha@lists.debian.org, distro-pkg-dev@openjdk.java.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On 8 March 2010 14:36, Lennart Sorensen wrot= e: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 12:44:59PM +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote: >> Ok, I didn't realise it was a hard linked copy. =C2=A0I'll disable that;= we >> don't want the ecj patches affecting the main tree. > > Applying a patch to a hardlink copy does not affect other copies. > patch creates a new file (hence breaking the hardlink). =C2=A0At least wh= en > using the patch command in the default way. =C2=A0Maybe it has an option = for > working in place on files, but I have never looked for such an option > so I have no idea. > > The linux kernel package has been relying on this for years as have many > other packages. > > Please don't change it since it won't make any difference other than to > take more diskspace and time to do a build. > That does make more sense as to what I was seeing; the openjdk-ecj patches have never affected the main openjdk tree in the past that I've seen. Reverted. > -- > Len Sorensen > --=20 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