RE: [java-gnome-hackers] Makefile change?

[Jeffrey M. <Jef...@Br...>]

> I started investigating the libglade port by building what's already
> there, and found a surprise:  on Linux (probably Solaris too, but it's
> been awhile) the default linker mode is to allow unresolved external
> references during a build.  In this case, 
> org_gnu_glade_LibGlade.c calls
> makeBaseObjectClass which I can't find anywhere.  Is that 
> unimplemented,
> or am I missing a library?

That is an old method that is no longer around.  It's purpose
was to make a java object and initialize the pointer to the
native peer.  Below is the source for this method.

jobject makeBaseObjectClass (JNIEnv *env, void *peer)
{
  if (peer == NULL) {
    return NULL;
  }
  else {
    jclass cls;
    jobject result;
    jlong result_jl;
    char class[20];
    char fullclass[100];
    int cmp;

    strcpy(class, gtk_type_name(GTK_OBJECT_TYPE(peer)));
    cmp = strncmp("Gtk", class, 3);
    if (cmp == 0)
      sprintf(fullclass, "gnu/gtk/%s", class);
    else
      sprintf(fullclass, "gnu/gnome/%s", class);
    
    cls = (*env)->FindClass(env, fullclass);
    
    result = (*env)->AllocObject(env, cls);
    *(void **) &result_jl = peer;
    (*env)->SetLongField (env, result, nativepeerFid, result_jl);
    return result;
  }
}

As you can see, much of this code is not relevant to the
current state of the project.

> But back to the build problem: IMHO the build should have 
> failed because
> makeBaseObjectClass was missing, instead of failing at run 
> time.  Adding
> "-Xlinker --no-undefined" to each link step catch the error during the
> build.  I replaced the makeBaseObjectClass call temporarily 
> with a "not
> implemented" exception throw -- the method still isn't 
> implemented, but
> at least the error says it's because a method was called 
> which shouldn't
> have been (yet), and not because of a problem in the client 
> environment.
> 
> Since this is both my first proposed change and one that changes the
> current build philosophy, I thought I should run it by 
> everyone first. 
> Anyone feel strongly that we shouldn't check for unresolved references
> during the build?

I think it is time we clean up the build process.  I completely
agree with your suggestion.

-Jeff