On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Stephen Kitt <st...@sk2.org> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:36:17AM +0000, peter green wrote: >> Libreoffice hasn't yet been built on armhf. I consider libreoffice >> to be a reasonablly important package and one that we need to get in >> before we can claim we have a reasonablly complete port. >> > [...] >> >> This (build-)dependency chain leaves me with a few questions >> 1: what is the current status of gnat-4.6 on armhf? does an upload >> look likely any time soon? >> 2: why does libreoffice need mingw-w64 in the first place? > > libreoffice uses mingw-w64 to build a DLL, unowinreg.dll, which is > provided in the libreoffice-dev package. As I understand it the DLL > itself isn't used on Debian, but it is provided by the SDK because it > is supposed to be bundled with plugins which need to access the > registry, and therefore to be able to correctly build "shippable" > plugins using Debian the SDK packages need to provide the DLL.
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 mingw-w64 cross-compiler output would be an x86 64-bit DLL, which simply wouldn't even run on an ARM processor anyway seems to have entirely escaped everyone's attention. 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 let's see if they have a sense of humour, eh? l. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDyj=rqmiekmqe2z1u03hvr8_27dkdsjzfcyjtma2jl...@mail.gmail.com
