Re: Bug#963109: libreoffice: Please drop clang from build-dependencies for alpha and ia64
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.ports.alpha,gmane.linux.debian.ports.ia64 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 6/19/20 1:08 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Am 19. Juni 2020 12:52:40 MESZ schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]>: >> 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? Thanks, Adrian