Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 03.01.2016 20:01, Mike Stump wrote: On Jan 3, 2016, at 9:34 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: On 03.01.2016 17:23, Andrew Haley wrote: On 03/01/16 15:52, Matthias Klose wrote: No, libgcj versions up to 4.9.3 didn't change the value for releases taken from the same branch. All of

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 02.01.2016 17:11, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/01/16 15:53, Matthias Klose wrote: In any case, GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION should be changed to not include __GNUC_MINOR__ anymore. Maybe for the gcc-5-branch, set it unconditionally to 3 so that it won't change anymore with future releases from the

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 03/01/16 15:52, Matthias Klose wrote: > No, libgcj versions up to 4.9.3 didn't change the value for releases taken > from > the same branch. All of 4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.9.3 have the same > GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION. But 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 have *different* > GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSIONs. > >> > Why

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 03.01.2016 15:17, Andrew Haley wrote: On 03/01/16 11:38, Matthias Klose wrote: On 02.01.2016 17:11, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/01/16 15:53, Matthias Klose wrote: In any case, GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION should be changed to not include __GNUC_MINOR__ anymore. Maybe for the gcc-5-branch, set it

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 03/01/16 11:38, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 02.01.2016 17:11, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 02/01/16 15:53, Matthias Klose wrote: > In any case, GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION should be changed to not include > __GNUC_MINOR__ >>> anymore. Maybe for the gcc-5-branch, set it unconditionally to 3 so

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On Jan 3, 2016, at 9:34 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 03.01.2016 17:23, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 03/01/16 15:52, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> No, libgcj versions up to 4.9.3 didn't change the value for releases taken >>> from >>> the same branch. All of 4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.9.3

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 03.01.2016 17:23, Andrew Haley wrote: On 03/01/16 15:52, Matthias Klose wrote: No, libgcj versions up to 4.9.3 didn't change the value for releases taken from the same branch. All of 4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.9.3 have the same GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION. But 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 have *different*

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 21.04.2015 16:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:29:52PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 02.01.2016 16:39, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/01/16 14:40, Matthias Klose wrote: preparing for a test rebuild of the archive, and trying to run gcj-dbtool (from GCC 5) with libgcj16 (from GCC 6): $ gcj-dbtool -n /tmp/foo.db libgcj failure: gcj linkage error. Incorrect library ABI version

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 02/01/16 14:40, Matthias Klose wrote: > > preparing for a test rebuild of the archive, and trying to run gcj-dbtool > (from > GCC 5) with libgcj16 (from GCC 6): > > $ gcj-dbtool -n /tmp/foo.db > libgcj failure: gcj linkage error. > Incorrect library ABI version detected. Aborting. > >

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 02/01/16 15:53, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> In any case, GCJ_CXX_ABI_VERSION should be changed to not include >>> __GNUC_MINOR__ >>> >> anymore. Maybe for the gcc-5-branch, set it unconditionally to 3 so >>> >> that it >>> >> won't change anymore with future releases from the gcc-5 branch? >>

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

- Original Message - On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:04:04PM -0400, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed though these days? Weren't there basically zero changes to libjava (both libjava and

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On 04/21/2015 04:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:29:52PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump

[patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, and update the cygwin/mingw32 files. ok for the trunk? Matthias gcc/ 2015-04-21 Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com * config/i386/cygwin.h (LIBGCJ_SONAME): Set libgcj version to -17. * config/i386/mingw32.h

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed though these days? Weren't there basically zero changes to libjava (both libjava and libjava/classpath) in the last 2 or more years? The few

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed though these days?

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

- Original Message - On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed though these days? Weren't there basically zero changes to libjava (both libjava and libjava/classpath)

Re: [patch] [java] bump libgcj soname

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:04:04PM -0400, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:07:13PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: bump the libgcj soname on the trunk, as done for every release cycle, Is that really needed though these days? Weren't there