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

LibreOffice architecture support (was: Fwd: Plan to remove dead C++ UNO bridge implementations (bridges/source/cpp_uno/*))


I am not giung to fight for this - so if you want to keep

- alpha

- hppa

- ia64

- m68k

- powerpc and powerpcspe

- sparc and sparc64

(which are for many BD-Uninstallable since ages because it does not have Java (anymore), didn't do a long-ago transition, ...)

speak up at upstream or  they will be gone. And without those bridges no architecture support for it.

Note that riscv64 would already be there if ftpmaster allowed the experimental upload out of NEW (there since November.)



-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Plan to remove dead C++ UNO bridge implementations (bridges/source/cpp_uno/*)
Datum: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 17:31:12 +0100
Von: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
An: libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
Kopie (CC): Sakura286 <sakura286@outlook.com>, wjh-la <wujiahuan@loongson.cn>, Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org>, Tor Lillqvist <tml@collabora.com>

There are currently 27 different, per-platform C++ UNO bridge implementations at bridges/source/cpp_uno/, some of which are presumably dead by now. And my recent <https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/ef533553559fe09b4afab651fc692885d1acf4ed%5E!/> "Rudimentary support for dynamic_cast on UNO proxy objects" (which had to touch each of them individually) was the latest example how even presumably dead ones have ongoing maintenance cost. Therefore, I would like to remove (on master, towards LO 7.6) the ones that can clearly be identified as being dead.

Below, I sorted those 27 implementations into 5 categories: Ideally, each active implementation would be built regularly by Jenkins; those 9 that are go into category 1. Next, there are 2 additional implementations that I know are built for Fedora releases; they go into category 2. Next, there are 2 additional implementations that I presume are built for Debian releases (Rene, correct me if I'm wrong); they go into category 3. And then there are 3 implementations that are presumably in active use elsewhere (Tor, wjh-la, Sakura286, correct me if I'm wrong); which go into category 4. That leaves 11 implementations that are presumably dead, in category 5.

So if you know about any active use of any of those 11 implementations in category 5 below, please report back here. Otherwise, the plan (to be discussed in the ESC) is to eventually remove them in due course.

(1) Built regularly by some <https://ci.libreoffice.org/> configuration:

* gcc3_linux_aarch64 (also for macOS)
<https://ci.libreoffice.org/job/gerrit_android_aarch64/>, <https://ci.libreoffice.org/job/lo_daily_tb_mac_arm64/>

* gcc3_linux_arm

* gcc3_linux_intel

* gcc3_linux_x86-64

* gcc3_macosx_x86-64

* gcc3_wasm

* msvc_win32_arm64

* msvc_win32_intel

* msvc_win32_x86-64

(2) Release builds for Fedora (e.g., <https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2105337>):

* gcc3_linux_powerpc64

* gcc3_linux_s390x

(3) Presumably release builds for Debian (per architectures at <https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/>):

* gcc3_linux_mips

* gcc3_linux_mips64

(4) Presumably somewhat actively maintained:

* gcc3_ios

* gcc3_linux_loongarch64
only added recently in 2022 with <https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/d3625d968901eb93a9680db8d1165f70de3fd64e%5E!/> "Add loongarch64 support."

* gcc3_linux_riscv64
only added recently in 2022 with <https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/bc9487f745befde6534fd46058e119256952323d%5E!/> "Add riscv64 support"

(5) Presumably dead:

* gcc3_aix_powerpc

* gcc3_linux_alpha

* gcc3_linux_hppa

* gcc3_linux_ia64

* gcc3_linux_m68k

* gcc3_linux_powerpc

* gcc3_linux_s390

* gcc3_linux_sparc

* gcc3_linux_sparc64

* gcc3_solaris_intel

* gcc3_solaris_sparc

Reply to: