Linker name conflicts due to optimization in gjavah

Thu Aug 18 10:00:00 GMT 2005

On 8/18/05, Danny Smith <dannysmith@clear.net.nz> wrote:
> > The backup (non-inlined) copy is emitted as a weak symbol and
> > should not normally cause linking errors. Perhaps the stock FSF
> > binutils' ld does not (yet) have proper support for weak symbols
> > on MinGW. See if this patch:
> >
>> Actually, it should be emitted as a link-once COMDAT symbol the way C++ inlines
> are..

It probably is - I don't know for sure. I just took a "W" in nm's
output to mean a weak symbol, that's all.
> The PE_COFF link-once sematics are tried and true. No need for latest binutils.
>> Weak definitions are not really supported in PE-COFF. Weak externals are
> supported.

I wonder what changed in 4.1. GCJ for MinGW used to build just 
fine in 3.4 and 4.0, IIRC, no?
> I wouldn't go down the pragma #interface/implementation road Unless it is done
> carefully, it can really mes up dllimport/dllexport.
>> I would like to help more, but unfortunately I haven't been able to buiild
> libgcj natively on my humble windows box (XP. Athlon 2000, 512 MB phys mem) for
> months.

Well, my home PC is even "humbler" (P3 750MHz, 512MB RAM) but
I manage to do a native bootstrap of C, C++ and Java in around 150-
160 minutes on Linux. If you have Linux, you can try the crossed-native
build approach as given in:
 http://ranjitmathew.hostingzero.com/phartz/gcj/bldgcj.html
Thanks,
Ranjit.
-- 
Ranjit Mathew Email: rmathew AT gmail DOT com
Bangalore, INDIA. Web: http://ranjitmathew.hostingzero.com/