openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Damjan Jovanovic <>
Subject Re: C++ standard when building OpenOffice
Date Mon, 04 Nov 2019 01:14:46 GMT
Thank you for the info. I haven't had good experiences with Boost in my
Win64 attempts either...

Don, how feasible do you think Go or Rust are, to start using in place of

On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 1:08 AM Don Lewis <> wrote:

> On  3 Nov, Don Lewis wrote:
> > For much of our history, until fairly recently, the versions of gcc that
> > we used defaulted to -std=gnu++98 when compiiling C++ code.
> >
> > When FreeBSD on i386 and amd64 switched from gcc to clang, it also
> > defaulted to -std=gnu++98.  Clang has been C++11 compliant from version
> > 3.3 onwards.  Around the time of the switch, I added the
> > -DHAVE_STL_INCLUDE_PATH compiler flag so that clang would use it's own
> > STL include files instead of the boost TR1 includes.  Clang was
> > perfectly happy using its own STL include files even though they were
> > not part of C++98, only C++11.
> >
> > Later on, when clang 6 changed the default to gnu++14, the build
> > generated tons warning and some number of errors.  To work around this,
> > I added the -std=gnu++98 compiler flag to force the old mode.
> >
> > FreeBSD on powerpc still uses gcc and it recently came to my attention
> > that the build was broken there.  The FreeBSD port of AOO to powerpc
> > does not use -DHAVE_STL_INCLUDE_PATH, so it was falling back to the
> > boost TR1 headers.  The FreeBSD port uses the system boost, and recent
> > versions of boost have dropped TR1 support.  To work around that, I
> > tried enabling -DHAVE_STL_INCLUDE_PATH to use the gcc C++ headers.  This
> > failed badly because the gcc STL headers check to see if the compilation
> > mode is C++11 or better and immediately error out of this is not the
> > case.  Switching the compilation mode to c++11 results in the warning
> > and error spew mentioned above.  I tried modifying the stlport headers
> > to include the gcc TR1 headers in gnu++98 mode.  That worked better, but
> > I still got some mysterious C++ errors that I was not able to figure
> > out.  My next attempt will be to try the boost non-TR1 headers.
> That was a dead end. Recent boost appears to assume that the STL headers
> are provided by the system.  I'll probably have to switch back to
> bundled boost and use its TR1 headers.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message