On Sat, 2006-Aug-26 15:43:26 -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
>In <20060826192418.GA82155@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl <firstname.lastname@example.org> typed:
>> On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 02:40:24PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> > In <20060826180900.GA81762@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl <email@example.com> typed:
>> > > On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 02:00:51PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> > > > 1) The compiler can build i386 binaries, but the toolchain in general
>> > > > doesn't do the right thing with the -m32 flag.
>Yup. If you tell it -L/usr/lib32 (which gets installed if you build the
>world with WITH_LIB32 defined), it'll find that. Then complain because
>/lib/crt1.o is the 64 bit one. If I use the command line arguments:
>-m32 -nostartfiles /usr/lib32/crt1.o /usr/lib32/crti.o /usr/lib32/crtbegin.o /usr/lib32/crtend.o /usr/lib32/crtn.o -L/usr/lib32
>simple programs build and run properly.
The incorrect linking path is fixable by doctoring the "specs" file
used by gcc (see the output of 'gcc -dumpspecs'). There have been
occasional threads in freebsd-amd64 about getting i386 mode fully
working but I don't think any of them have proceeded beyond agreeing
that there is still some work to be done in this area. If you feel
that you have the time/skills to address some of these problems, your
input would be valued.
>> AFAIK, you can't rebuild the base system compiler with multilib
>> because it is integrated into the FreeBSD tree without the full
>> gcc configury.
I'm not sure that this is totally true because we're only talking
about i386 and amd64 - both of which are in the FreeBSD tree and
the default amd64 buildworld does build the i386 bits.
>> > > > 2) The system can run i386 binaries, but the pkg system doesn't
>> > > > support installing packages from other architectures.
This is a known deficiency. Again, check the -amd64 archives. Note
that there are still problems with the emulation system: You can run
things like 'lame' successfully, but I've never managed to get (eg)
java to work.
>> > > > 3) openoffice doesn't build on amd64, and the i386 build doesn't run
>> > > > on amd64, so the recommended way to run openoffice on amd64 is to
>> > > > run the Linux build.
OOo2.0 should (and generally does) build. The entire OOo port seems
very fragile and occasionally breaks for no obvious reason. I don't
recall ever seeing the recommendation to use the Linux build, though.
If you have problems with building OOo on a reasonably up-to-date
-stable or -current amd64 system, with an up-to-date ports tree, I
suggest you take it up on freebsd-openoffice.