Keep in mind that a workaround for this is to explicitly qualify the method with the desired class (ie. the one where the method is actually defined).
In other words, instead of Encoder8859_1.loadTable() in the source code, use EncoderEightBitLookup.loadTable() The only problem I see with this approach is if EncoderEightBitLookup is not accessible when Encoder8859_1 is. Then an alternative workaround would be to modify Encoder8859_1 by adding this method: public static void loadTable() { super.loadTable(); } I'm not familiar with the ORP code, but these workarounds shouldn't be too hard. Do you want me to file a PR for the gcc bug? I've yet to get a working compile of gcj on my cygwin box, so I'm not sure how well I would do on bug reporting. Mark Wielaard wrote: > > That (and the example) seems to make sense. But it also means that we > don't have one bug in jikes, but two bugs, one in ORP and one in gcj > byte code generation. Sigh. > > That basicly means we don't recommend jikes 1.15a for this Classpath > release and ORP 1.0.9, or we wait for a new ORP release with a fix. > Hmmmm. I would opt for releasing now and adding a note about this > problem (with newer versions of jikes and ORP) to the README/INSTALL > file. Or we could try to produce a patch for ORP, but I am not sure that > is very easy. > > Cheers, > > Mark -- This signature intentionally left boring. Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] BYU student, free software programmer _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath