Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:36:14 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org>, miwi@freebsd.org, freebsd-office@freebsd.org Cc: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Fwd: libreoffice-4.0.1_1 failed on i386 8 Message-ID: <5166F48E.8090103@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5166E5A2.3010708@coosemans.org> References: <5166E5A2.3010708@coosemans.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2013-04-11 18:32, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On 2013-04-02 06:52, Martin Wilke wrote: ... >>> local symbol 0: discarded in section `.text._ZN3osl5MutexD1Ev' from /tmp/lobuild/workdir/unxfbsdi.pro/CxxObject/sal/rtl/source/logfile.o >>> clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) > > After a bit of googling I found similar errors reported here: > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9758 > > That page says it's a bug in ld fixed here: > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2004-06/msg00130.html > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2004-07/msg00002.html (fixup) > > The first patch was also submitted here: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=gnu/161869 > > Libreoffice is built with clang from ports but that still uses ld > from base which is quite old on FreeBSD 8. Isn't it more reasonable to have clang from ports built by ld from the binutils port instead? > I think it's too late > and too risky to start patching binutils in stable/8 and releng/8.4 > now (Dimitry?), I am not sure if such a patch would make it past re@, and even then, users of older releases will be left in the cold. > so maybe it's best to build Libreoffice on 8.x with > ports gcc (which uses ports binutils). See attached patch. Which also uses the ld from the binutils port, so there isn't much difference in the end. :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5166F48E.8090103>