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

2016-04-28 Thread Andrew Haley
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

2016-04-28 Thread Matthias Klose
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 until it was bumped for the final release. This

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

2016-04-28 Thread Rainer Orth
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 final release. > > This is PR java/70839. I just not

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

2016-04-28 Thread Rainer Orth
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

2016-04-28 Thread Andrew Haley
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

2016-04-28 Thread Matthias Klose
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