Hi Ned,
I think it's been assigned to the toolchain folks already, but it's in
bugzilla at any rate:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206525
Incidentally, there has been some talk that the included fastjar sources
have been taken out of upstream gcc, and they've resorted to using an
existing fastjar or jar detected by configure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00381.html
I have a patch for gcc-4.1.2 to enable that as well.
http://vaiprime.visibleassets.com/~cfriedt/patches/gcc-4.1.2-externalize-jar.patch
When I tried to build with java support it failed all of the time before
I applied this patch. I guess the downside is that you'd need an
existing fastjar or jar binary on your build system.
Cheers,
Chris
Ned Ludd wrote:
This absolutely should be reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] via
https://bugs.gentoo.org
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 05:05 +0100, Christopher Friedt wrote:
Hi,
I was just wondering if I should submit a bug report for
sys-devel/gcc-4.1.2 on Gentoo's main bugzilla -
it's exactly the same problem found here:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=422971
and I've traced it to
gcc-4.1.2-patches-1.0.2.tar.bz2/patch/62_all_gcc4-noteGNUstack.patch
Incorrect:
===================================================================
--- libffi/src/arm/sysv.S.jj 2004-10-28 15:10:11.000000000 +0200
+++ libffi/src/arm/sysv.S 2005-02-08 16:14:02.282767581 +0100
@@ -207,3 +207,6 @@ LSYM(Lepilogue):
.ffi_call_SYSV_end:
.size
CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV),.ffi_call_SYSV_end-CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV)
+#if defined __ELF__ && defined __linux__
+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
+#endif
===================================================================
Correct:
===================================================================
--- libffi/src/arm/sysv.S.jj 2004-10-28 15:10:11.000000000 +0200
+++ libffi/src/arm/sysv.S 2005-02-08 16:14:02.282767581 +0100
@@ -207,3 +207,6 @@ LSYM(Lepilogue):
.ffi_call_SYSV_end:
.size
CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV),.ffi_call_SYSV_end-CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV)
+#if defined __ELF__ && defined __linux__
+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",%progbits
+#endif
===================================================================
There are several similar patches in that file, and they all share the
same syntax, so I would imagine that all of the lines containing
+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
are incorrect in the whole patch file, but I cannot confirm.
~/Chris
--
[email protected] mailing list
