From owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 24 11:57:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: openoffice@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8901E16A412 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:57:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aturetta@commit.it) Received: from mail.logital.it (85-18-201-99.ip.fastwebnet.it [85.18.201.99]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C256F43D55 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:57:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from aturetta@commit.it) Received: from [192.168.33.30] (85-18-250-113.ip.fastwebnet.it [85.18.250.113]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.logital.it (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id k9OBvQkD012877 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:57:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from aturetta@commit.it) Message-ID: <453DFF9A.1050702@commit.it> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:57:14 +0200 From: Angelo Turetta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1b2) Gecko/20060821 SeaMonkey/1.1a MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openoffice@freebsd.org References: <453D1419.8080009@chillt.de> In-Reply-To: <453D1419.8080009@chillt.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=ham version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mail.logital.it X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.5, clamav-milter version 0.88.5 on mail.logital.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH] openoffice.org-2.0 fails to compile on 6-STABLE X-BeenThere: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting OpenOffice to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:57:55 -0000 Bartosz Fabianowski wrote: > Hi > > I have just upgraded from 2.0.3 to 2.0.4 and compilation broke for me on > three separate accounts. All three were manifestations of the same error > in OO.o's source: The keyword "NULL" is used to denote a null pointer, > which is legal in C but not in C++. The number "0" should be used > instead. Thanks a lot! I have the same problem but didn't have the time to investigate a patch. > I am surprised that nobody else seems to have run into this. > Maybe my gcc is more picky about standards for some reason? I bet you are building on AMD64! The problem started, I think, with the 20061013 update of the gcc-4.1.x port, which is only required when you compile for AMD64. I suppose most people use OO.o on i386, where this bug is not apparent (gcc-3.4.x is more forgiving). Angelo.