Re: [patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

On 04/28/2016 12:45 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > yes, that looks good. Can't approve it myself. OK. Andrew.

Re: [patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

On 28.04.2016 12:52, Rainer Orth wrote: Rainer Orth writes: Matthias Klose writes: Bumping the version from from 6.0.0 to 6.1.0 broke gcj, because the minor version is still encoded in the gcj abi, not seen during development of the 6 series

Re: [patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

Rainer Orth writes: > Matthias Klose writes: > >> Bumping the version from from 6.0.0 to 6.1.0 broke gcj, because the minor >> version is still encoded in the gcj abi, not seen during development of the >> 6 series until it was bumped for the

Re: [patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

Matthias Klose writes: > Bumping the version from from 6.0.0 to 6.1.0 broke gcj, because the minor > version is still encoded in the gcj abi, not seen during development of the > 6 series until it was bumped for the final release. This is PR java/70839. Rainer --

Re: [patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

On 28/04/16 08:55, Matthias Klose wrote: > Ok for the 6 branch and the trunk? OK, Andrew.

[patch] Don't encode the minor version in the gcj abi version

Bumping the version from from 6.0.0 to 6.1.0 broke gcj, because the minor version is still encoded in the gcj abi, not seen during development of the 6 series until it was bumped for the final release. The gcc-5-branch needs a slightly different approach, because we froze the abi version only