[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#963109: libreoffice: Please drop clang from build-dependencies for alpha and ia64

On 6/19/20 1:08 PM, rene@rene-engelhard.de wrote:
> Am 19. Juni 2020 12:52:40 MESZ schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>:
>> So nothing that keeps us from using GCC in cases where clang is not
>> available.
> Correct. Except staying as close as possible with upstream.

While at the same time, the source contains 20+ patches:

> https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/tree/debian-experimental-7.0/patches

I wouldn't consider that "close to upstream".

>>>> Not sure why you want to enforce architectures off libreoffice when
>>>> it’s technically not necessary.
>>> Read the comment.
>> That's just your personal way of implementing it. It's not mandatory to
>> do it
>> this way. You can just create a simple whitelist where clang is always
>> enabled
>> and disabled on any other architecture. It's not really rocket science.
> Trust me, I know. I do this for all kind of stuff in rules (e.g. for skia itself, see below)

This isn't a technical argument though.

>> It's also not a given that clang generates faster code on _any_ given
>> architecture,
>> it might be true for x86_64, but not necessarily for armhf or s390x.
> s390x doesn't matter here at all as it is be and skia doesn't support be at all. Thus we get --disable-skia and thus no clang usage.
> But generally you're right, but I am trying to stay as close upstream as possible here.

Again, this isn't a compelling technical argument. There is no additional workload
involved if you allow building LO with GCC on non-clang architectures and it also
does not cause harm any of the release architectures. You are not required to fix
any code that doesn't build on a non-release architecture, that's what we porters
are for.

I have honestly no clue why you would deny porters to build LibreOffice on non-release
architectures given these circumstances. There is no paragraph in the Debian Policy
to base this decision on nor are there any technical reasons.

Would it be okay if I send a pull request to make the necessary changes?


 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Reply to: