Caolan McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 14:03 +0200, Joachim Lingner wrote:
Anyway, I would not wait until your CWS is integrated, because then I'm
afraid that my CWS will not be accepted for OOo 3.0 anymore. But we can
add additional platforms later on.
Oh yeah, don't block on any of the ones I mentioned, they're of err...
"specialized interest" is the most charitable description for a lot of
them, I don't really expect a lot of extensions to be built for OOo on
mainframe linux.
>> However, currently we could add
>> linux_arm
>> linux_mips
Of these "confused" arch names then yeah, just add those two that are
the most potentially useful at the moment. That covers the lemote OOo
people and their mips(le)-based system and anyone that can successfully
fits the OOo port onto an arm-eabi nokia device.
Changing the value of $_ARCH is incompatible but I do not see and
believe that it is used for MIPS and ARM. Grepping through OOo code did
not show me that any code depends on the variable. This is not to be
confused with the preprocessor defines. Therefore let me get back to
your earlier offer to adapt the bootstrap code, that is, the macro.hxx.
There probably needs to be done something in the build environment as
well, such as setting some compiler defines. You probably know that
better than I :)
I already added to my code these values:
PowerPC_64
ARM_EABI
ARM_OABI
MIPS_EL
MIPS_EB
S390x
If you code these values for macro.hxx then it should work right out of
the box (keeping my fingers crossed :) ). Please put me on cc, so I can
track you CWS. I will prepare some test extension, so you can verify if
everything works (provided that you have the proper machines at hand).
Joachim
C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
