| 1 |
If you're bothered, check out OpenOffice 1.9.52. That builds fine. Don't |
| 2 |
forget, every GCC 3.x for new x hasn't compiled OpenOffice when it went |
| 3 |
to ~x86. 3.3 hit and 3.2 was needed. 3.2 hit and it didn't compile at |
| 4 |
all. 3.1 was pre-OOo I think. We're not doing anything out of the ordinary. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
However, I'd be inclined to suggest that perhaps a 1.9.52 OOo ebuild, |
| 7 |
package.mask'd and -* keyworded, should perhaps be committed for testing |
| 8 |
purposes. Any objections? If not, I'll make the tarball and ebuild - it |
| 9 |
works here but my ebuild is filthy. Also when 2.0 is released the 64-bit |
| 10 |
fixes will be merged too. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Alberto Garcia Hierro wrote: |
| 13 |
> El Sábado, 11 de Septiembre de 2004 20:43, Daniel Goller escribió: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
>>GCC 3.4 should be ready to go ~x86 w/o being profile masked in x86 |
| 16 |
>>profiles anymore. |
| 17 |
>>There are no critical packages that dont compile with it. |
| 18 |
>>If anyone sees a reason to not unmask it, let me know, otherwise we |
| 19 |
>>would like to unamsk it soon. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> IMHO, GCC 3.4 shouldn't go ~x86 until openoffice.org can be built with it. |
| 23 |
> Just my 2 cents. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Regards, |
| 26 |
> Alberto |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives