> On 4 Oct 2016, at 18:23, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 1:41 AM, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 04/10/16 09:39, Rainer Orth wrote: >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>>> On 05.09.2016 17:13, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>>> As discussed. I think I should ask a Global reviewer to approve this >>>>> one. For obvious reasons I haven't included the diffs to the deleted >>>>> gcc/java and libjava directories. The whole tree, post GCJ-deletion, >>>>> is at svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcj/gcj-deletion-branch >>>>> if anyone would like to try it. >>>> >>>> still breaks bootstraps when configured with --enable-objc-gc. >>>> >>>> the immediate step should be to fix the bootstrap failure, as an >>>> additional step >>>> to remove boehm-gc from the gcc sources and be able to use an external >>>> boehm-gc. >>> >>> the first part is handled by my unreviewed patch >>> >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg02437.html >> >> Looks obvious to me, fixes bootstrap. I think no-one will complain >> if you check it in. > > I don't know who wants to review it, but if people want me to, Ok. The idea > is that if ObjC is the last remaining user in tree for boehm-gc, then > reasonably I'm the last man standing. Of course, if others want to review > approve the patch, I'm fine with that. > > I'm fine with patches to externalize boehm-gc if people want to push that > direction.
+1 Iain
