Hi, On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 01:49:02PM +0000, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > it's even more hilarious than that: it's actually because java can't > access windows registry functions, so someone wrote a c-based DLL > which java *can* bind to. the fact that the end-result of the
Yes, that is the point. > mingw-w64 cross-compiler output would be an x86 64-bit DLL, which No, it's a 32 bit dll. # file /usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll /usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll: PE32 executable (DLL) (console) Intel 80386 (stripped to external PDB), for MS Windows i686-w64-mingw32-g++ is called. > simply wouldn't even run on an ARM processor anyway seems to have > entirely escaped everyone's attention. No. In contast, Stephen said it correctly. "[...] isn't used on Debian, but it is provided by the SDK because it is supposed to be bundled with plugins [...] and therefore to be able to correctly build "shippable" plugins using Debian the SDK packages need to provide the DLL." > i describe the chain here, and have made a request on behalf of the > sanity of the debian-arm team that the libreoffice developers consider > adding a compile-time switch to remove the complete mental brain-fart > retardation from the software for which they are responsible: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46614 To be fair, that all is inherited from OOo. And it's a non-issue now that we *do* have mingw-w64 on armhf. > let's see if they have a sense of humour, eh? If the bug is formulated like the nonsense in this post I won't believe so. Regards, Rene -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120225140424.gg17...@rene-engelhard.de
