From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-133647-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 35318 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2016 18:31:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 35303 invoked by uid 89); 4 Oct 2016 18:31:11 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*M:0604, hear
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:31:01 +0000
Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24])	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))	(No client certificate requested)	by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E01331CCC33;	Tue,  4 Oct 2016 18:30:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11])	by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u94IUwMU024933;	Tue, 4 Oct 2016 14:30:59 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFA 0/3] Fix various bugs found by static analysis
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
References: <1475531646-18049-1-git-send-email-tom@tromey.com> <CAH=s-PM=1iJrBB_qAa_NY+yCNRJ1wDs135Aju_6J=aZW6A_Axg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <b6c07add-0604-a9ff-bce3-2828f0044bee@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:31:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH=s-PM=1iJrBB_qAa_NY+yCNRJ1wDs135Aju_6J=aZW6A_Axg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2

On 10/04/2016 04:14 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> wrote:
>>
>> * PR 20654, incorrect code in java_value_print.  Now that gcj has been
>>   removed, I think it's probably better to simply remove the Java
>>   language support.  If this sounds ok, let me know, and I can provide
>>   a patch.
>>
> 
> I am fine to remove java language support in GDB, but I'd like to hear
> what other people think about this.
> 

I'm fine with removing gcj support, but then again I never really
needed it personally.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves