Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 44880
Solarisgccport: no adjustvisibility patch
Last modified: 2007-06-26 05:46:38 UTC
It is not necessary to use adjustvisibility because 1. gcc doesn't have "fix and continue" function and 2. debug symbol format for gcc-3.4 or later is dwarf2, not stabs. These patches disable adjustvisibility for Solaris gcc.
Created attachment 23730 [details] pstrules.mk no adjustvisibility patch
Created attachment 23731 [details] rules.mk no adjustvisibility patch
accept. ause: BTW, if you look at the patches, don't you think that this whole concept of ADJUSTVISIBILITY is worth some magic/unification. It looks like these two patches are long only because it is not well-thought in the source. In ideal world, both patches would be reduced to two lines in one file.
Hi, Pavel. Thank you for your comment but I have two questions. What is ause? > In ideal world, both patches would be reduced to two lines in one file. Is it better for me to rewrite *.mk drastically to centralize ADJUSTVISIBILITY?
taniguchi: your patch is OK. But the sources are not ;-) If you want to fix the probem in the source itself, you're welcome :-) Ause (Hans' IRC nick) is build master so he can bring some light into this and maybe propose better solution (restructuring processing of this) and thus also taking account about != GCC part with it. Let's wait for his opinion.
my suggestion would be to have something like .IF "$(OS)"=="SOLARIS" && "$(product)"=="full" && "$(debug)"=="" .... ADJUSTVISIBILITY*=$(WRAPCMD) adjustvisibility .ENDIF in "unitools.mk" and change the rules to -.IF "$(OS)"=="SOLARIS" && "$(product)"=="full" && "$(debug)"=="" +.IF "$(ADJUSTVISIBILITY)"!="" this is a big patch once, but the desired "two line" solution afterwards.
taniguchi: could you please do that in one go? hjs: we do not need $(WRAPCMD), because this is really Solaris only. Right?
taniguchi: can you please do that so we can include it into 2.0 or should I retarget to 2.0.1?
retarget to 2.0.1.
set target to Later, please feel free to reset target to earlier one, if patch is complete.
Hi "taniguchi", are you going to work on the proposed improvement of the patch?
It seems the patch is not (yet) in a state to be integrated. Feel free to reopen the issue if you are going to work on it again.
close issue.