Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:09:27 +0900 (JST)
From:      NAKATA Maho <chat95@mac.com>
To:        gerald@pfeifer.com
Cc:        openoffice@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: GCJ/GIJ OOo status
Message-ID:  <20051210.130927.38702952.chat95@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.62.0512040039200.92900@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
References:  <20051203.171107.74666553.chat95@mac.com> <Pine.BSF.4.62.0512040039200.92900@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.62.0512040039200.92900@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> 
Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, NAKATA Maho wrote:
> > I updated my blog entry and ask for your help.
> > with gcc-4.1-20051125, in terms of compilation, there are a
> > lot of improvements. However, gij seems to have a bug but gcj
> > seems to work perfectly, i think this is a FreeBSD specific issue.
> 
> Unfortunately, we'll have to disable the libjava builds with the next 
> update of the gcc41 port that I'm going to commit shortly since building 
> libjava now consumes insane amounts of memory.
> 
> (See <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-12/msg00046.html>.)
> 
> Can you also reproduce this problem, if you enable libgcj again?

I checked with 20051209 version but coundn't reproduced.
however this also happens with OOo with gij build. consume ~1G of memory
at gcj-dbtools..

thanks
-- NAKATA, Maho (maho@FreeBSD.org)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051210.130927.38702952.chat95>