Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default
"H.J. Lu" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel,gmane.comp.gcc.devel,gmane.comp.gcc.patches,gmane.comp.gcc.java.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Law <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/01/10 12:16, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 15:09, Ian Lance Taylor<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Comments? Approvals? >> >> FWIW, I agree with this patch for the same reasons stated by Ian. >> Other than massively increasing build times, I have not seen >> substantial benefits for having java enabled by default. Ada, on the >> other hand, has shown more usefulness in exposing bugs (particularly, >> middle end) and is many times faster. >> >> This is the kind of patch that requires more consensus or agreement >> from the java maintainers. aph, are you dead set against disabling >> java? Is there anything we could do to change your mind? > > Building libjava (at least for me) is primarily painful due to 2 files (the > names escape me) and the rather poor coarse level parallelism (can't build > the 32bit and 64bit multilibs in parallel for example). > > Has anyone looked at fixing the build machinery for libjava to make it more > sensible? > > I'd personally prefer java over ada as I'm able to understand java code > easier, thus when something does go wrong I'm able to debug it much faster. > FWIW, it takes about 33minutes to bootstap gcc trunk on Fedora 13/Intel Core i7 870 with both 32bit and 64bit libraries. I configure gcc with -enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld --enab le-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-haifa --prefix=/usr/gcc-4.6.0 --with- local-prefix=/usr/local --with-fpmath=sse --with-plugin-ld=ld.gold --enable-gold --with-fpmath=sse -- H.J.