Re: Please reenable GCJ on mips
- To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@not.real.address.com>
- Cc: aba@not.so.argh.org, debian-gcc@lists.debian.org, debian-mips@lists.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org, pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Please reenable GCJ on mips
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:02:30 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20051007140230.GA20969@nevyn.them.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@not.real.address.com>, aba@not.so.argh.org, debian-gcc@lists.debian.org, debian-mips@lists.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org, pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 000201c5cb1f$cda0a850$926a3b18@NCN>
- References: <[🔎] 000201c5cb1f$cda0a850$926a3b18@NCN>
On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 05:16:28AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I begin to get the picture.
>
> Apparently the MIPS ABI is just plain broken. It contains some sort of
> impassable hard limit on relocation table size, breaking random packages at
> random times with no possible fix. Nobody can fix this without changing
> the ABI.
>
> Lovely. Good grief, I would not want to support this architecture under
> those circumstances, but as long as it doesn't interfere with supporting
> other architectures, if you think you can do it, that's fine.
You don't get the picture. In fact the above is completely wrong. I
recall explaining this to you yesterday.
It's a lot of work to fix and no one has done it. That's not the same
thing at all.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
Reply to: