On 5 Nov, Peter Kovacs wrote: > what if we require LLVM as build requirement and build OpenOffice only > with LLVM instead of preinstalled gcc? > > the project provides packages for Windows, Linux (And here RHEL 7.4) and > mac. Cygwin offers Version 8.01 > > Debian offers also LLVM as Version 8. > > It would just work around the issue we currently face, while increasing > the build requirements only by little.
That's not likely to be helpful. Mixing an application built with LLVM with system C++ libraries compiled with gcc is likely to fail. It is best to use the same compiler for everything. Also, using a non-default compiler would require the user to install the matching C++ runtime libraries. What set me on this quest was trying to build 4.1.7 with gcc on FreeBSD/powerpc, where LLVM is not quite ready for prime time. Either compiler can generally be persuaded to work. In C++98 mode, LLVM can use it's regular C++ STL headers, whereas GCC needs to use the boost TR1 headers for STL. In C++11 mode, either compiler can use the C++ STL headers, but our code isn't quite ready for C++11, and we can't yet make the changes for C++11 that are not compatible with the older compilers on some platforms. > We have to drop CentOS6 support completely, as a price, but I think this > is already decided. Dropping support for CentOS 6 for 4.2.x would be nice for a couple of reasons. GCC on CentOS 6 doesn't support C++11, and CentOS 6 is our last platform that doesn't have the new gstreamer. But if we don't support CentOS 6 for 4.2.x, then we probably need to extend support for 4.1.x. > I could not figure out if OS/2 can use LLVM. @Yuri do you think that > would be fine for the OS/2 development? > > It would simplify things a lot, and we can jump up the standard requirement. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
