From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 27 00:03:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 907A416A4DE for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:03:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB54943D46 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:03:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org) Received: (qmail 41612 invoked by uid 1001); 27 Aug 2006 00:03:27 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:03:27 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17648.57678.873663.331638@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:03:26 -0400 To: Peter Jeremy In-Reply-To: <20060826231042.GI16768@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <17648.35923.366716.65517@bhuda.mired.org> <20060826180900.GA81762@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <17648.38296.39807.492937@bhuda.mired.org> <20060826192418.GA82155@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <17648.42078.268722.152591@bhuda.mired.org> <20060826231042.GI16768@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.0.3 (Seattle Slew) From: Mike Meyer Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, Steve Kargl Subject: Re: amd64 questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:03:39 -0000 In <20060826231042.GI16768@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>, Peter Jeremy typed: > >> > > > 3) openoffice doesn't build on amd64, and the i386 build doesn't run > >> > > > on amd64, so the recommended way to run openoffice on amd64 is to > >> > > > run the Linux build. > OOo2.0 should (and generally does) build. The entire OOo port seems > very fragile and occasionally breaks for no obvious reason. I don't > recall ever seeing the recommendation to use the Linux build, though. > If you have problems with building OOo on a reasonably up-to-date > -stable or -current amd64 system, with an up-to-date ports tree, I > suggest you take it up on freebsd-openoffice. Just to clarify, I came across a number of posts to the effect that "the Linux build is the only alternative for OOo at this point" while googling for information about it, and the build was failing for me. This was sort of the point of asking - to see if my from searching the web after the build failed for me was correct. It appears that one of the source tarballs for OOo was busted; a very recent change to the port deals with that. So I updated my ports tree, did "make distclean; make" to restart it. The version of OOo that it grabs is clearly newer than the old one; it deals with gethostbyname_r having been MFC'ed, which the sources I was trying previously didn't. All in all, the move from 5-STABLE/i368 to 6-STABLE/amd64 has been relatively painless. I think I had four things that didn't just build: three of them had relatively painless workarounds, and OOo. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.