--- Comment #16 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-21 10:37 ---
Fixed by the following patches:
Main patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00124.html
Build fix for ARM:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00143.html
Stylistic: remove casts
http
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-15 08:28 ---
As for the format Sun mentions this DTD in their API doc:
http://java.sun.com/dtd/preferences.dtd
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19613
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:28 ---
Posted a patch to fix the issue:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00139.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
--- Comment #10 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:26 ---
(From update of attachment 10771)
Forget about this patch. it doesnt compile and there is a working one on the
java-patches list.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=10771)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10771&action=view)
a preliminary patch (not tested)
Unfortunately I am in a hurry and have to leave soon. If anyone depends
--- Comment #7 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:52 ---
Changed the title and have a preliminary patch.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:06 ---
The ffi usage breaks the build on arm :(
Can someone tell me which macro I can use to test ffi availability?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
--- Comment #2 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-01 16:52 ---
Added aph to get some ideas on how to solve this.
Some ideas:
The code that uses the ffi structure is so complicated because it is neccessary
to prepare a call that takes one argument (a class name). I plan to put
--- Comment #2 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-01 13:49 ---
The patch for PR 24616 contains variants of the methods I was talking here that
do not throw any exception and instead make the caller responsible for throwing
the correct exception or error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java
--- Comment #29 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-01 13:45 ---
Fixed by: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00124.html
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
in _Jv_Linker::link_symbol_table
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http
--- Comment #28 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-01-31 16:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=10766)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10766&action=view)
updated and fixed test setup
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|
--- Comment #3 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 21:53 ---
The version of gcj in SVN cannot handle loading classes of case d ( = accessing
a nonstatic field which is removed) when BC-compiled classes are used
(interpreted mode is fine in all cases).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 14:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=10409)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10409&action=view)
test setup
Same as above but fixed the messages about expected and unexpected Throwables.
--
thebohe
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 14:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=10408)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10408&action=view)
test setup
A test setup for the above mentioned 4 cases. There are three scripts which
runs different inter
nassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25265
--- Comment #27 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 13:52 ---
I changed the PR's title to reflect more clearly what it is about.
This is about *missing* classes not about methods and fields which have been
removed, changed or whatever.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net ch
--- Comment #26 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 11:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=10407)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10407&action=view)
updated test setup
Added two more tests:
invokeMethodIndirect1
invokeMethodIndirect2
A ne
--- Comment #25 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-05 11:34 ---
aph, this would be your test case right?
class T {
void fail(){
System.out.println("fail-0");
M m = new M();
System.out.println("fail-1");
m.test();
}
}
// Byte
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #9 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-01 14:05 ---
The Sun JVM does not run shutdown hooks and similar stuff when running with
-Xrs[0].
[0] -
http://www-inf.int-evry.fr/cours/java/jdk1.4docs/tooldocs/solaris/java.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #8 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-12-01 12:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=10378)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10378&action=view)
a test for the shutdown situation
Here is another small test case.
Output on another free VM looks li
--- Comment #22 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-17 12:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=10262)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10262&action=view)
lazy linking - part 2
This is the same patch as above but corrects the behavior in case that the
static f
--- Comment #20 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-16 16:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=10255)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10255&action=view)
lazy linking - part 2
This is the second part of the lazy linking patch. Applying both fixes most of
the p
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-16 16:50 ---
By working on PR 24616 I found out that this belongs together.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-16 16:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=10254)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10254&action=view)
lazy linking - first part
This is the first part of the patch. See above for what it does.
--
thebohe
--- Comment #17 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-09 15:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=10188)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10188&action=view)
lazy linker test setup
This is a small update to the test setup. BC-compilation is now done with
de
--- Comment #16 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-09 15:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=10187)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10187&action=view)
preliminary patch - just for review
This is another preview of the patch. The patch begins to more a
--- Comment #14 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-08 10:15 ---
> But we don't need to use ffi_call here, we can just call the exception
> throwing function directly.
Right. That worked fine.
> Then you'll realize that these functions don't need to be sepa
--- Comment #13 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-07 20:03 ---
anthony you're right. It should work without ffi_call invocation.
Thanks for the review. I try to find out whether this fixes my segfault too,
tomorrow.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24616
--- Comment #9 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-07 12:51 ---
Ok, more details:
With my patch applied I run the test application in lazylinker.tar.bz2. Set up
the variable CLASSPATH to point to lib/java/lazylinker.jar, start gdb with gij,
set a breakpoint at link.cc:743 and run
--- Comment #7 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-07 10:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=10161)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10161&action=view)
preliminary patch - just for review
As andrew suggested I tried preparing a closure that is stored in the
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-05 15:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=10153)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10153&action=view)
preliminary patch - just for review
Here is a first start for a patch that makes access to static metho
--- Comment #4 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-05 14:57 ---
By further inspecting the problem I got the impression that gcj's approach of
linking is flawed. As I understand it gcj does linking-on-initialization but
for the java language, being built-around the idea of
on: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: thebohemian at gmx dot net
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24638
pass the verifier
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: thebohemian at gmx dot net
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #3 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-02 11:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=10113)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10113&action=view)
lazy linker test setup
This is a newer version of the test for class linking. The change is that the
actua
--- Comment #2 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-01 19:38 ---
More hints for the test:
running the start script as:
??-run.sh nothing
should succeed on every vm in every variant since the critical code locations
are not touched in any way. However this only succeed for gij in
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-11-01 19:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=10103)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10103&action=view)
A test for the linking mechanism
This is a slightly bigger test for the linking mechanism. Unpack the tar.b
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24616
--- Comment #15 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-30 19:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=10082)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10082&action=view)
proposed fix
This patch includes all the lazyfications and a fix for to_array() involving
primitive arra
--- Comment #13 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-21 16:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=10041)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10041&action=view)
proposed fix
This fixes this bug and bunch of related problems.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #12 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-21 16:13 ---
Tromey suggested to not transform all Utf8Const object into a canonical form so
I fixed the invokevirtual problem in the first way.
I introduced a new method _Jv_equalUt8Const_classnames method which reliably
compares
--- Comment #11 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-19 16:14 ---
In the JavaUtils class of axis 1.2 RC2 contains the following instruction:
639: invokevirtual
With a missing DataHandler class file this JavaUtils class can be verified
successfully on sun' s jvm but fails at
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24433
--- Comment #10 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-18 17:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=10022)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10022&action=view)
a test class for the aanewarray lazyfication
This tests lazy array instantiation which was not possible
--- Comment #9 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-18 17:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=10021)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10021&action=view)
new version of to_array method
This is the lazyfied version of the to_array method which is uses
--- Comment #8 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-18 16:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=10020)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10020&action=view)
assignments to object
This test class does all kinds of assignments to java.lang.Object variables. If
you
--- Comment #7 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-18 16:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=10019)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10019&action=view)
new version of compatible
I added a check which looks whether the LHS of an expression is
java.lang.Obj
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |thebohemian at gmx dot net
|dot org
--- Comment #6 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-18 00:18 ---
With the help of Tromey and the team we made an interesting obervation:
class Foo{
static Object o;
void method(){
o = new RemoveClassFile();
}
}
This is accepted by you-know-which VM but
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-17 18:47 ---
Possible fix: Take the class name as it is given on the command line and
replace all "/" with "." .
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24410
gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24410
--- Comment #2 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-16 00:44 ---
After some explanation on IRC and a test run with "gij -noverify" I concluded
that this bug is a duplicate of 17021.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17021 ***
--
thebohemian at gmx dot n
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-16 00:44 ---
*** Bug 24385 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-15 17:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=9988)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9988&action=view)
Test application showing the problem
Unpack the application in your tomcat webapps folder and start the
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24385
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: thebohemian at gmx dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc
58 matches
Mail list logo
