Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 09 Mar 2022 17:38:27 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        office@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 262008] editors/libreoffice failed to build
Message-ID:  <bug-262008-25061-ZZBeyONx87@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-262008-25061@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-262008-25061@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D262008

--- Comment #57 from Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Piotr Kubaj from comment #53)
Upstream doesn't have the libc++abi workaround parts for powerpc and powerp=
c64,
so maybe it was never necessary there? Or maybe nobody ever ran into the is=
sue
on these architectures.

The question is whether the addition of __attribute__((aligned)) to struct
_Unwind_Exception makes any difference in the size of __cxa_exception on the
platform.  On x86_64, the maximum alignment is 16 bytes, so the addition of=
 the
attribute makes the total struct grow from 120 to 128 bytes.

Depending on how powerpc and powerpc64 struct layouts end up, adding the
attribute may or may not make a difference. If it does, then we should prob=
ably
add a similar piece of workaround code as was done for x86_64.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-262008-25061-ZZBeyONx87>