Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:15:03 -0500 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: "Mikhail T." <mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com>, office@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Why can't gcc-4.2.1 build usable libreoffice? Message-ID: <5123CF37.7000506@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmok2HFaU4QQHBEaO0iL3HE4pLpA=iFa-xfqQtOk9JewioQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <511CED39.2010909@aldan.algebra.com> <CADLo83-a7yqkFhgMinGiookjvgtFuTVeGQobOepuHDCeH_wsog@mail.gmail.com> <51238AE9.20205@aldan.algebra.com> <CADLo83-FoLrZGgkDZjjQ-jb-fcZNS3isn-F=zbd9pVkkmXQZUQ@mail.gmail.com> <5123ADEC.2040103@aldan.algebra.com> <CAJ-Vmok2HFaU4QQHBEaO0iL3HE4pLpA=iFa-xfqQtOk9JewioQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2013-02-19 12:23:07 -0500, Adrian Chadd wrote: > In any case, why hasn't that port been blessed with the "requires > gcc 4.6+" port option/dependency? I thought that's why we _have_ > that. The short answer is we cannot support gcc 4.6+ unless we have a dedicated *ports* compiler. Okay, it seems to be a FAQ now and I'll try to explain as much as I can. If you have binaries compiled with g++ from ports tree, those binaries should not be linked with binaries that are compiled with the base compiler because they pull in different libstdc++ and friends and they have different ABIs. Also, some C++ libraries are very "sensitive" to standard C++ libraries, e.g., Boost. On top of that, UNO C++ bridge is really tightly coupled with C++ runtime. [1] Some libraries come with configuration headers and they are usually coupled with *build* environment, not *runtime* environment. So on and so forth. You see, that's why we had numerous build failure reports for LibreOffice in C++ unit tests. [2] Traditionally, OpenOffice.org builds everything from bundled libraries and headers so that it is almost self-contained. For example, STLport is used as a C++ STL library by default. This model makes perfect sense for a stand-alone downloadable package because the build environment may be very different from runtime environment. LO has kinda opposite philosophy, i.e., modular is better. This model works well if users are using prebuilt packages, i.e., Linux distros. [3] What do we go from here? I don't know. One thing I know for sure is we cannot support every possible build/runtime environment. Feel free to suggest your ideas and thoughts. Jung-uk Kim 1. http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Uno 2. Most of them are actually legit but I gave up on explaining why and turned them off by default. If you had build failure before, now you may experience runtime failures instead, sorry. 3. We may go back to monolithic build model, perhaps. Not sure. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRI883AAoJECXpabHZMqHO+6gH/2uvg/KTlsHKuxGG1XGPjJct icKy/nsCJK9XkkNaA3O7Zkpiddb1y2TNf9WW+/NmttfsnZ2aMos1jBnfIBr9l+ny Gw8V09JXOtUj1Ew3QZRF0efXz0sB7C37jEEeJWgF6IB4spq+BLAriCKShsa8bh+p PTwbE+ooib5Pzyf9NWIHzATiykeC1pSHz+3lnRhpNv9TFawcHsGyOfJRmr37eefO jodUWXzbJivCMFteWBaZwUHJkWVfMq4h+sdUyui0dP+T1EULQPpafNNkFkPcHthA dZzFfYGKgUjqn7PfO4B8wK5wqb/mO1rxgQ7NPQMla30PCN6iy9mNCFnMaR/nrzw= =PgIy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5123CF37.7000506>