As another round of debugging passes, I've been trying to isolate the
specific changes between karmic and jaunty which caused the regression
in the first place. I haven't been testing on lucid since it stands to
reason the cause of the UNO failure between karmic and lucid is
unchanged. The test results have been baffling ...

For reference purposes:

Control Tests:
jaunty chroot + jaunty toolchain = PASS
karmic chroot + karmic toolchain = FAIL

karmic chroot + karmic gcc-4.3  = FAIL
karmic chroot + jaunty binutils = FAIL
karmic chroot + jaunty binutils + karmic gcc-4.3 = FAIL

karmic chroot + karmic binutils + karmic gcc-4.3 + jaunty glibc = XPASS
jaunty chroot + karmic glibc = XFAIL

I think we're dealing with a very bazaar interaction between OOo, the
toolchain, and glibc. I can repeat the above tests with jaunty's gcc-4.3
grafted onto karmic, or via versus, but I'm questioning if it would make
a realistic difference as there isn't a lot of changes between
jaunty->karmic gcc-4.3 except a new minor vesion.

I'm honestly stumped at the root cause at the moment, and may have to
look at disassembling the binaries to determine the root differences
between them.

-- 
all openoffice apps die in 
'com::sun::star::ucb::InteractiveAugmentedIOException' on armel in karmic
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/417009
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to