On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Francois Tigeot <ftig...@wolfpond.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:17:33AM -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> > I'd like to consolidate the different OUTPATH values to a single one or two
>> > at most (unx and wnt). Thoughts ?
>>
>> That will break cross-compilation as currently implemented. It isn't
>> entirely unthinkable that somebody might at some point want to cross-compile
>> from some (well, *the*) mainstream Linux platform, x86_64, to a rare Linux
>> platform.
>
> I have no idea how cross-compilation is currently implemented, but can't that
> be done with the same build directory name for all platforms ? I would think
> the path which matters most in the end is the installation one...
no, in cross compile you may have to build object/executable that run
on the build machine on top of objects/executable for the target
machine (thinks about stuff we build and use during the build like
idlc or the like)
>
>> If we have just one OUTPATH for all Unixes, the above won't work.
>
> Can't we at least get rid of the '350' subdirectory ? Apart from $OUTPATH it
> seems to always be empty.
>
> Due to the way the build system works, I have to put many of the lib/
> subdirectories in LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Otherwise, LibreOffice can simply not be
> packaged in pkgsrc:
>
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${BUILDLINK_DIR}/lib:${WRKSRC}/desktop/unxdfly.pro/lib:${WRKSRC}/solver/350/unxdfly.pro/lib:${WRKSRC}/desktop/unxnbsd.pro/lib:${WRKSRC}/solver/350/unxnbsd.pro/lib:${X11BASE}/lib
>
> For now, I only do this for DragonFly and NetBSD but this is not ideal and I
> will
> certainly blow up some limit if I add all the Linux variants...
I'm confused, why do you need to concatenate all of these ?
Norbert
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
