On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:28 AM Abe Skolnik via Gcc-bugs <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Dear all, > > AFAIK, GCJ has been dead for _years_... quoting > <https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCJ>: "As of GCC 7, the GCC Java frontend and > associated libjava runtime library have been removed from GCC. The > information on this page is kept here for reference but only applies to GCC 6 > and earlier." > > ... yet we still have at least... > > 67 bugs open against the component "awt": > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&component=awt > > ... and at least... > > 479 bugs open against the product "classpath": > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&product=classpath > > > > For discussion: why not close _all_ Java-related bugs in the GCC bugzilla, > perhaps with a nicely-granular status such as > "CLOSED_WONTFIX___WONTFIX_BECAUSE_FEATURE_IS_DEPRECATED", or at least "good" > old "CLOSED_WONTFIX"? > > > > With all due respect to whoever [if anybody] is unhappily still responsible > for backporting bug-fixes to pre-7 GCC re e.g. the C or C++ or Fortran > compiler[s], I think the chances of _anybody_ *ever* fixing those old > Java-in-GCC bugs is _extremely_ tiny.
Note the classpath component is not about GCJ (and GCC) but rather it is for the GNU classpath project which is not really active but it is still a project and might become more active in the future. So closing these as won't fix is NOT the correct thing to do unless the classpath project itself has decided it no longer wants to use the GCC's bugzilla instance or has decided it is no longer being a project. Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Sincerely, > > Abe
