Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Salikh Zakirov wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
I think you could use 4.1.0 in Fedora Core 5. Since patch level
shouldn't really affect the C++ compilation restrictions, the same patch
should break on 4.1.0 as well.
Gregory, I've looked at harmony-1635.patch you've
Yes, I use a gcc version 4.0.2 on RHEL. I have no problems building +
running it now
I can confirm that gcc 4.1.1 compiled this patch without any problems.
As I've written, patchlevel shouldn't matter here, and if gcc 4.1.0
worked, 4.1.1 should work as well (with very rare exceptions).
Yep, I broke it. I just noticed. (I didn't read mail last night after
a certain point...)
Sorry - will fix ASAP.
geir
Ilya Berezhniuk wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to build DRLVM, but it doesn't compile (slot.h, jvmti_heap.h
cannot be found).
It looks like it's because commit r470903 for
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
did we ever bottom out on what range of GCC we'll support?
I have a patch I want to commit that is known to not compile under 4.1.1...
Hmm no I don't remember such agreement. I think GCC is mostly backwards
compatible, and anything that compiles on 4.1.1 should
On the 0x216 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
did we ever bottom out on what range of GCC we'll support?
I have a patch I want to commit that is known to not compile under
4.1.1...
Hmm no I don't remember such agreement. I think GCC is mostly
Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x216 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
did we ever bottom out on what range of GCC we'll support?
I have a patch I want to commit that is known to not compile under
4.1.1...
Hmm no I don't remember such agreement. I think GCC is
Basically, I want to uplift my own platform to 4.x, and then work the
kinks out of that patch.
I just want to know what X is.
If no one says anything, I'll figure it out and declare it :)
geir
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x216 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Basically, I want to uplift my own platform to 4.x, and then work the
kinks out of that patch.
I just want to know what X is.
If no one says anything, I'll figure it out and declare it :)
You have to choose X between 0 and 1.
Either 4.0.x (which AFAIK is used in
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
I think you could use 4.1.0 in Fedora Core 5. Since patch level
shouldn't really affect the C++ compilation restrictions, the same patch
should break on 4.1.0 as well.
Gregory, I've looked at harmony-1635.patch you've uploaded to HARMONY-1635,
and I see that is based
Salikh Zakirov wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
I think you could use 4.1.0 in Fedora Core 5. Since patch level
shouldn't really affect the C++ compilation restrictions, the same patch
should break on 4.1.0 as well.
Gregory, I've looked at harmony-1635.patch you've uploaded to HARMONY-1635,
Salikh Zakirov wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
I think you could use 4.1.0 in Fedora Core 5. Since patch level
shouldn't really affect the C++ compilation restrictions, the same patch
should break on 4.1.0 as well.
Gregory, I've looked at harmony-1635.patch you've uploaded to HARMONY-1635,
FWIW, I have committed the last 4 or 5 patches with gcc v4.0.2-14.EL4. I
did not have to install the compiler. It was part of redhat package. It
was under /usr/bin/gccv4. All that was required was to hack on some
softlinks.
On 11/3/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to build DRLVM, but it doesn't compile (slot.h, jvmti_heap.h
cannot be found).
It looks like it's because commit r470903 for HARMONY-1635 doesn't contain
added files.
did we ever bottom out on what range of GCC we'll support?
I have a patch I want to commit that is known to not compile under 4.1.1...
geir
like this yet, sorry.
-Nathan
-- Forwarded message --
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 16, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [general] version of gcc and other tools
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
None from me, but please also add some
Comments inline.
[Original Message]
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: 10/10/06 11:11:19 AM
Subject: [general] version of gcc and other tools
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools
Nathan Beyer wrote:
I haven't figured out to configure the ECJ options via the Ant task
yet, so if anyone know, please let the list know.
Add a compilerarg nested element, e.g.
Index: build-java.xml
===
--- build-java.xml
how do you turn off the default ones?
Tim Ellison wrote:
Nathan Beyer wrote:
I haven't figured out to configure the ECJ options via the Ant task
yet, so if anyone know, please let the list know.
Add a compilerarg nested element, e.g.
Index: build-java.xml
RTFL(ink) below
Tim
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
how do you turn off the default ones?
Tim Ellison wrote:
Nathan Beyer wrote:
I haven't figured out to configure the ECJ options via the Ant task
yet, so if anyone know, please let the list know.
Add a compilerarg nested element, e.g.
I did. Ah - now I see... - and +. First read seemed like all those
did was turn them on...
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
RTFL(ink) below
Tim
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
how do you turn off the default ones?
Tim Ellison wrote:
Nathan Beyer wrote:
I haven't figured out to configure the ECJ
Subject: Re: [general] version of gcc and other tools
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
None from me, but please also add some useful message for people if not
found like ECJ not found. Please copy useful info to useful info...
Nathan Beyer wrote:
On 10/15/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED
, please let the list
know.
Mark, Tim, IBM folks,
This may require an update to the automated builds if Ant isn't setup
like this yet, sorry.
-Nathan
-- Forwarded message --
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 16, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [general] version
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: ECJ set as default compiler (WAS: [general] version of gcc
and
other tools)
IMHO the correct ECJ jar should be located at
classlib/trunk/depends/jars/ecj_3.2/ecj.jar
You may also try to increase java heap size by setting ANT_OPTS
variable to something like -Xmx512M
: [general] version of gcc and other tools
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
None from me, but please also add some useful message for people if not
found like ECJ not found. Please copy useful info to useful info...
Nathan Beyer wrote:
On 10/15/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I suppose that as a temporary solution, we can just get people to drop
ECJ into ant/lib...
Yes, that would be my preferred solution too, until Ant support comes along.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [general] version of gcc and other tools
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being able to build on multiple
versions gives a better feeling of goodness
,
Sveta Konovalova
-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:11 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [general] version of gcc and other tools
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC
On 10/15/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I suppose that as a temporary solution, we can just get people to drop
ECJ into ant/lib...
Yes, that would be my preferred solution too, until Ant support comes along.
Any objections to setting the harmony default
None from me, but please also add some useful message for people if not
found like ECJ not found. Please copy useful info to useful info...
Nathan Beyer wrote:
On 10/15/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I suppose that as a temporary solution, we can just
Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 16, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [general] version of gcc and other tools
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
None from me, but please also add some useful message for people if not
found like ECJ not found. Please copy useful info to useful info...
Nathan
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 02:07 Nathan Beyer wrote:
I've set the default compiler value to use the ECJ adapter. I've also
added a check to fail the build (in build-java.xml and
build-tests.xml) if the ECJ adapter class is missing. The message says
that the ECJ JAR is missing and to copy it
Every problem I ran into with Sun's compiler has been around generics
syntax and it's generally when the ? extends XXX feature is used.
The errors general popup from the consumer-side. The class that has
bitten me multiple times is the ReferenceQueue and it's methods [1]
inside of a while loop.
Matt Benson wrote:
--- Alexei Zakharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan,
My solution was to collect classpath in the
temporary file. No
external configs is needed. I'm too lazy to look
into archive for the
original message so I write it again here. In brief
it uses the
executable property of
Egor Pasko wrote:
I am OK with all. Some comments:
* we should explicitly say that it is a GNU make.
* the more restrictive GCC, the better. What is the most restrictive
now? gcc-4.1?
P.S.: I personally like diversity in tool chains. Let's make a single
configuration not a must, but a
Which is what the first message of the thread said. We've come full
circle :)
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
Egor Pasko wrote:
I am OK with all. Some comments:
* we should explicitly say that it is a GNU make.
* the more restrictive GCC, the better. What is the most restrictive
now? gcc-4.1?
I am OK with all. Some comments:
* we should explicitly say that it is a GNU make.
* the more restrictive GCC, the better. What is the most restrictive
now? gcc-4.1?
P.S.: I personally like diversity in tool chains. Let's make a single
configuration not a must, but a matter of priority. So, we
I'd prefer to be using ECJ for our compiler, but I haven't heard
anything lately about getting that back into the build scripts.
Do we still have a problem with it? If so - I've been using ecj for
building the classlib for quite a long time already (without any
tricks with moving ecj jar from
On 10/13/06, Alexei Zakharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd prefer to be using ECJ for our compiler, but I haven't heard
anything lately about getting that back into the build scripts.
Do we still have a problem with it? If so - I've been using ecj for
building the classlib for quite a long
Nathan,
My solution was to collect classpath in the temporary file. No
external configs is needed. I'm too lazy to look into archive for the
original message so I write it again here. In brief it uses the
executable property of the ant javac task. The sample ant script
looks like this:
===
!--
--- Alexei Zakharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan,
My solution was to collect classpath in the
temporary file. No
external configs is needed. I'm too lazy to look
into archive for the
original message so I write it again here. In brief
it uses the
executable property of the ant javac
On Friday 13 October 2006 11:37 Egor Pasko wrote:
I am OK with all. Some comments:
* we should explicitly say that it is a GNU make.
* the more restrictive GCC, the better. What is the most restrictive
now? gcc-4.1?
P.S.: I personally like diversity in tool chains. Let's make a single
To update the statistics, my tools:
- MS Windows Server 2003 / IA32:
MSVS .NET 2003
ant-1.6.5
JRockit JDK 1.5.0_03
- Linux / IA32:
gcc 3.3.3
GNU make 3.80
ant-1.6.5
JRockit JDK 1.5.0
Thanks,
Pavel
On 10/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My tools are:
- WindowsXP
- MSVS .NET 2003
- ant-1.6.5
- Sun JDK 1.5.0_07_b03
- Linux
- gcc 3.4.5
- ant-1.6.5
- IBM JDK 1.5.0_08_b03
- make 3.8.0
How about the following first stab at Geir's idea of will work tool
chains? The idea is to quickly converge the below so that
Weldon Washburn wrote:
My tools are:
- WindowsXP
- MSVS .NET 2003
- ant-1.6.5
- Sun JDK 1.5.0_07_b03
- Linux
- gcc 3.4.5
- ant-1.6.5
- IBM JDK 1.5.0_08_b03
- make 3.8.0
How about the following first stab at Geir's idea of will work tool
chains? The idea is to quickly
As Geir mentions, there a compiler difference's in Sun's JDK. The
changes are noticeable between 5.0_7 and 5.0_8. Note: Sun as released
5.0_9.
I'd prefer to be using ECJ for our compiler, but I haven't heard
anything lately about getting that back into the build scripts.
-Nathan
On 10/12/06,
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being able to build on multiple
versions gives a better feeling of goodness and harmony in the universe
and I encourage people to work on other
2006/10/10, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being able to build on multiple
versions gives a better feeling of goodness and harmony in the
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/10/10, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being able to build on multiple
versions gives a better feeling of
--- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
[SNIP]
ant
Good call. When I was setting up my new box, I
found that the beta for
ant 1.7 doesnt' work...
That was that thread I started over the weekend - w/
1.6.x, it's fine...
Whoa... I missed that
On 10 October 2006 at 20:32, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/10/10, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being able to build on
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 10 October 2006 at 20:32, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/10/10, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm so sick of this gcc problem.
Lets decide on the versions for GCC and other tools that will work. I
feel the same way that mark does re that being
On Debian based Linux machines, you need the packages binutils and
binutilts-dev (pretty sure this is needed).
Mike R.
On 10/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 10 October 2006 at 20:32, Alexey Petrenko
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/10/10, Geir
Yes, the -dev is critical if you want to compile...
Mike Ringrose wrote:
On Debian based Linux machines, you need the packages binutils and
binutilts-dev (pretty sure this is needed).
Mike R.
On 10/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 10 October 2006
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 20:10 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
2) Linux x86 :
GCC : 3.4.6
g++ : 3.4.6
make : 3.81b4
What are you using? what other tools should we list?
I recently setup a new machine (linux) and now have the complete list of
stuff that has to be installed
54 matches
Mail list logo
