From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2631 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2009 12:00:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 2555 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Oct 2009 12:00:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:00:01 +0000 Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9JBxxta032327; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:59:59 -0400 Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9JBxwcG006546; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:59:58 -0400 Message-ID: <4ADC54BD.4030007@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:00:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081009) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yuri@rawbw.com CC: java@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Is gcj dead? References: <4AD846B0.2080102@rawbw.com> <4ADAE903.2010009@redhat.com> <4ADB99E2.4000809@rawbw.com> In-Reply-To: <4ADB99E2.4000809@rawbw.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2 Yuri wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: >> 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? >> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41356 > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41361 Can't reproduce this. This is presumably a bug in the FreeBSD port of gcj. I'm not sure who maintains gcj on FreeBSD. > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41372 > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41375 > And today I added one more: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41745 All of these seem to be FreeBSD specific. I think that the FreeBSD port must be broken. The best plan is to build gcj from source and run the libgcj test suite. Then we'll know how brain-damaged the FreeBSD port really is. Andrew.