From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 21 14:17:46 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ECBC72E
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:17:46 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5C9F798
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:17:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
 (envelope-from <freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org>) id 1U8WyB-0003sN-QV
 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 15:17:55 +0100
Received: from cpc3-walt15-2-0-cust148.13-2.cable.virginmedia.com
 ([86.21.186.149]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 15:17:55 +0100
Received: from walterhurry by
 cpc3-walt15-2-0-cust148.13-2.cable.virginmedia.com with local (Gmexim 0.1
 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 15:17:55 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
From: Walter Hurry <walterhurry@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why can't gcc-4.2.1 build usable libreoffice?
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:17:23 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <kg5a9j$g9u$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <511CED39.2010909@aldan.algebra.com>
 <CADLo83-a7yqkFhgMinGiookjvgtFuTVeGQobOepuHDCeH_wsog@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN6yY1sY3_=Q4qLupBypj0jKRbpmUyKmC=QAE00D0b95oTZFzw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cpc3-walt15-2-0-cust148.13-2.cable.virginmedia.com
User-Agent: Pan/0.135 (Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea; GIT
 30dc37b master)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:17:46 -0000

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:35:35 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:

> Just for the record, is find that it works fine for me with gcc-4.6.
> 9.1-STABLE on i386 system. Building it with the default compiler results
> in a successful build, but the program would simply exit after a few
> seconds with no error. The exist status was 0. No messages. When I built
> with 4.6, it builds and runs fine, at least for the things I've tried.
> (4.6 invoked by setting WITH_GCC.)

I confess I don't understand what all the fuss is about. LO *wants* to 
build with clang, clang is part of base, and LO builds and runs perfectly 
with clang (for me at any rate: 9.1-RELEASE on amd64).

What is the issue? Is there some reason of which I am unaware, why people 
want to avoid using clang/llvm?