Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 22:28:45 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: office@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 263976] editors/libreoffice: Fails to build if LLVM_DEFAULT=90 (default) and LTO=on (non-default) Message-ID: <bug-263976-25061-qMg5Jta09t@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-263976-25061@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-263976-25061@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=3D263976 --- Comment #11 from Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to Dimitry Andric from comment #10) Tomoaki AOKI is the one building with LTO enabled and hitting the odd way editors/libreoffice is set up for handling such. My normal activities do not include building editors/libreoffice. editors/libreoffice is set up to not use devel/llvm* at all when LTO is off and to use devel/llvm${LLVM_DEFAULT} when LTO is turned on. That is the way its Makefile ends up working. As far as I can tell, if one forced LTO to be off but also forced LLVM_DEFAULT=3D90 , the compile error reported would still happen: devel/llvm90 is apparently too old to be used. But if one forces LTO to be on but does not also force a specific devel/llvm* to be used, one ends up with devel/llvm90 and ends up with the compile errors reported. So, as editors/libreoffice is set up, to use LTO one must also control which devel/llvm* is used to form a coherent combination. There may be a better way for editors/libreoffice to be set up --but I've not been working on proposing changes, just documenting the current status and why the reported things happened and why they were not llvm 14 tied. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: 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-263976-25061-qMg5Jta09t>