Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:17:43 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org> Cc: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org>, freebsd-office@freebsd.org, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>, miwi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fwd: libreoffice-4.0.1_1 failed on i386 8 Message-ID: <5166FE47.8080503@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5166F48E.8090103@FreeBSD.org> References: <5166E5A2.3010708@coosemans.org> <5166F48E.8090103@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2013-04-11 13:36:14 -0400, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 2013-04-11 18:32, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >> On 2013-04-02 06:52, Martin Wilke wrote: > ... >>>> local symbol 0: discarded in section >>>> `.text._ZN3osl5MutexD1Ev' from >>>> /tmp/lobuild/workdir/unxfbsdi.pro/CxxObject/sal/rtl/source/logfile.o >>>> >>>> clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see >>>> invocation) >> >> After a bit of googling I found similar errors reported here: >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9758 >> >> That page says it's a bug in ld fixed here: >> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2004-06/msg00130.html >> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2004-07/msg00002.html >> (fixup) >> >> The first patch was also submitted here: >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=gnu/161869 >> >> Libreoffice is built with clang from ports but that still uses >> ld from base which is quite old on FreeBSD 8. > > Isn't it more reasonable to have clang from ports built by ld from > the binutils port instead? That's entirely maintainer's call to make. However, I don't think it is really necessary if you asking my opinion. >> I think it's too late and too risky to start patching binutils in >> stable/8 and releng/8.4 now (Dimitry?), > > I am not sure if such a patch would make it past re@, and even > then, users of older releases will be left in the cold. Exactly my thought. >> so maybe it's best to build Libreoffice on 8.x with ports gcc >> (which uses ports binutils). See attached patch. > > Which also uses the ld from the binutils port, so there isn't much > difference in the end. :-) Agreed. :-) FYI, I have committed it in RedPorts: https://redports.org/changeset/11047 I believe that's enough. Please test if you can. Jung-uk Kim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRZv5HAAoJECXpabHZMqHOcHAH/1V2U2ajuzt8GW6WrPzVNN3I fHJVt450JputOGBiyuFvv0HULqPBun+kZ13QkKxJ6UWY2UZ24RbYizn9nP7FMOL9 4zMSk9rlNQyvZEb3PEvVBc39otlHlnV6jm0wq8GiWQF16x1vFC6Inihqy4Zwmh+b sJ2TkeqrHF5+/gCW0gIMqu6ap4Qnw706Tdh3b4UMumiNWj2fCmoVHopJ9KBQOMjm /zi8UrwTQBHvF0tELrtps3RDqKAIuKeNJCWe89jd/lkRQaia/rOCbwrEvEmcEpfp AB02Mqpio1Vd2VxZ52V5O7PrObf2fOsYeVvYDQXlUjswcE2lHJn1io+l44LDIq4= =LFMC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5166FE47.8080503>