Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Anthony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > 2. Merge the projects into a single source base in support of all of
> >    our combined goals.
> > 
> > [2] is also possible.  It will require developing a new build system
> > in which we can specify JNI or CNI bindings.  In libgcj, we currently
> > put CNI code in the directory with the java source.  It's easy to
> > imagine creating cni and jni subdirectories for each package and
> > maintain that code separately.  It's a little more complicated than
> > this - but that's the general idea.
> > 
> I prefer [2].  

It appears to me that libgcj/libjava/ is pretty close to where the
current classpath tree could plugin the easiest.  The configure in
libgcj's root directory seems mostly aimed at compiling within gcc.
Could the combination of the projects be best suited for libgcj just
to combine the one libjava directory?  I think as far as CVS goes we
could set it up so that the ,v files from Classpath's tree get copied
over to cygnus regularly in the libjava directory of libgcj.

One of the technical aspects to overcome is that libgcj can be treated
sort of like a VM which has special needs within the usual culprits
like java.lang.ClassLoader.  There are also various gcj specific
features like eCos, gettings system properties from GCJ_PROPERTIES,
etc. to consider.

I can't build libgcj at the moment, missing rpath on my system.  I
also can't find a reference to rpath on Debian's package search
engine.

creating Makefile
creating fficonfig.h
fficonfig.h unchanged
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/cbj/libgcj-build/i586-pc-linux-gnu/libffi'
rpath /usr/local/libgcj/lib -release 2.00-beta    
make[1]: rpath: Command not found
make[1]: [libffi.la] Error 127 (ignored)
libffi.la 
make[1]: libffi.la: Command not found
make[1]: *** [ffitest] Error 127
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/cbj/libgcj-build/i586-pc-linux-gnu/libffi'
make: *** [all-target-libffi] Error 2
lyta:~/libgcj-build$ rpath
bash: rpath: command not found

Brian
-- 
Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to