On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:46 PM, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > >> I'm going to try callcc alone against bsd-port head. > > Yes; don't build indy into it; it's too much of a moving target to integrate > with callcc etc.
Ok, I got this far into the build: DARWIN_C_SOURCE -c -o activationFrameKlass.o /Users/headius/projects/davinci/sources/hotspot/src/share/vm/oops/activationFrameKlass.cpp cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors /Users/headius/projects/davinci/sources/hotspot/src/share/vm/oops/activationFrameKlass.cpp: In member function 'int activationFrameKlass::do_oop_internal(oopDesc*, OopClosure&)': /Users/headius/projects/davinci/sources/hotspot/src/share/vm/oops/activationFrameKlass.cpp:106: warning: taking address of temporary make[7]: *** [activationFrameKlass.o] Error 1 make[7]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... make[6]: *** [the_vm] Error 2 make[5]: *** [fastdebug] Error 2 make[4]: *** [generic_build2] Error 2 make[3]: *** [fastdebug] Error 2 make[2]: *** [hotspot-build] Error 2 make[1]: *** [generic_debug_build] Error 2 make: *** [build_fastdebug_image] Error 2 This was against the revision the patch repo is synced to, so I'm going to try to build against bsd-port head now. Lukas: What revision of bsd-port should I be trying to apply/build this against? - Charlie _______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
