Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:31:02 -0500 From: "Mikhail T." <mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, office@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Why can't gcc-4.2.1 build usable libreoffice? Message-ID: <5123D2F6.5040909@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <5123CF37.7000506@FreeBSD.org> References: <511CED39.2010909@aldan.algebra.com> <CADLo83-a7yqkFhgMinGiookjvgtFuTVeGQobOepuHDCeH_wsog@mail.gmail.com> <51238AE9.20205@aldan.algebra.com> <CADLo83-FoLrZGgkDZjjQ-jb-fcZNS3isn-F=zbd9pVkkmXQZUQ@mail.gmail.com> <5123ADEC.2040103@aldan.algebra.com> <CAJ-Vmok2HFaU4QQHBEaO0iL3HE4pLpA=iFa-xfqQtOk9JewioQ@mail.gmail.com> <5123CF37.7000506@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 19.02.2013 14:15, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> What do we go from here? I don't know. One thing I know for sure is
> we cannot support every possible build/runtime environment.
>
> Feel free to suggest your ideas and thoughts.
Well, support for "every possible" combination is, of course, a toll order, but
support for the base cc/c++ is a reasonable expectation, in my opinion...
And if there is a *good* reason to reject the base compiler, I'd expect such
good reason to be documented -- preferably with bug-reports filed against either
the FreeBSD and its toolchain or against the LibreOffice code. Or both...
On 19.02.2013 14:21, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> There are damn good reasons all my systems have
> WITHOUT_CLANG=true in src.conf.
Actually, clang, whatever faults you may have seen in it, would've produced a
working libreoffice build. But it is not the cc/c++ on 9.1 and 8.3...
-mi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5123D2F6.5040909>