Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default

Matthias Klose <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gcc.patches,gmane.comp.gcc.devel,gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel,gmane.comp.gcc.java.patches
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 31.10.2010 20:09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Currently we build the Java frontend and libjava by default.  At the GCC
> Summit we raised the question of whether should turn this off, thus only
> building it when java is explicitly selected at configure time with
> --enable-languages.  Among the people at the summit, there was general
> support for this, and nobody was opposed to it.
>
> Here is a patch which implements that.  I'm sending this to the mailing
> lists gcc@ and java@, as well as the relevant -patches@ lists, because
> it does deserve some broader discussion.
>
> This is not a proposal to remove the Java frontend nor is it leading up
> to that.  It is a proposal to not build the frontend by default, putting
> Java in the same category as Ada and Objective C++.  The main argument
> in favor of this proposal is twofold: 1) building libjava is a large
> component of gcc bootstrap time, and thus a large component in the
> amount of time it takes to test changes; 2) it is in practice very
> unusual for middle-end or back-end changes to cause problems with Java
> without also causing problems for C/C++, thus building and testing
> libjava does not in practice help ensure the stability of the compiler.
> A supporting argument is since Sun has released their Java tools under
> the GPL, community interest seems to have shifted toward the Sun tools;
> gcc's Java frontend is in maintenance mode, with little new development
> currently planned.

please note that gcj is still required for a bootstrap of openjdk on platforms 
which don't yet have a working openjdk. At least for this purpose it is still 
maintained.

> This patch should not of course change whether or not distros choose to
> package the Java compiler; undoubtedly they would continue to do so,
> just as they package the Ada compiler today.
>
> Comments?  Approvals?

if build speed is the only issue, why not

  - disable the static libgcj build, if not explicitely enabled?

  - disable the biarch build for libgcj? most distributions don't
    have all of the depending libraries available for biarch builds.

Matthias
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.