AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
Just starting replaying w/ building 4.2.0 on macOS and ran into this: error: no type named 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' but the rub is that we for sure specify c++11 as we should: /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang++ -arch x86_64 -std=c++11 -arch x86_64 -o out/der_getint_unittest.o -c -O2 -fPIC -fno-common -pipe -DDARWIN -DHAVE_STRERROR -DHAVE_BSD_FLOCK -Wall -Qunused-arguments -Wno-parentheses-equality -Wno-array-bounds -Wno-unevaluated-expression -Werror -Wsign-compare -DXP_UNIX -UDEBUG -DNDEBUG -DNSS_NO_INIT_SUPPORT -DUSE_UTIL_DIRECTLY -DNO_NSPR_10_SUPPORT -DSSL_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_CIPHER_SUITE_NAMES -I../../external_tests/google_test/gtest/include -I../../external_tests/common -I../../../dist/out/include -I../../../dist/public/nss -I../../../dist/private/nss -I../../../dist/public/nspr -I../../../dist/public/nss -I../../../dist/public/libdbm -I../../../dist/public/gtest -std=c++0x der_getint_unittest.cc In file included from der_getint_unittest.cc:14: ../../external_tests/common/scoped_ptrs.h:36:1: error: no type named 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' SCOPED(CERTCertificate); - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
Boost has name collision with c++11. Switch the standard of. Then you have better chances I think. Am 15. August 2017 14:22:50 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski : >Just starting replaying w/ building 4.2.0 on macOS and ran into >this: > >error: no type named 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' > >but the rub is that we for sure specify c++11 as we should: > >/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang++ >-arch x86_64 -std=c++11 -arch x86_64 -o out/der_getint_unittest.o -c >-O2 -fPIC -fno-common -pipe -DDARWIN -DHAVE_STRERROR -DHAVE_BSD_FLOCK >-Wall -Qunused-arguments -Wno-parentheses-equality -Wno-array-bounds >-Wno-unevaluated-expression -Werror -Wsign-compare -DXP_UNIX -UDEBUG >-DNDEBUG -DNSS_NO_INIT_SUPPORT -DUSE_UTIL_DIRECTLY -DNO_NSPR_10_SUPPORT >-DSSL_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_CIPHER_SUITE_NAMES >-I../../external_tests/google_test/gtest/include >-I../../external_tests/common -I../../../dist/out/include >-I../../../dist/public/nss -I../../../dist/private/nss >-I../../../dist/public/nspr -I../../../dist/public/nss >-I../../../dist/public/libdbm -I../../../dist/public/gtest -std=c++0x >der_getint_unittest.cc >In file included from der_getint_unittest.cc:14: >../../external_tests/common/scoped_ptrs.h:36:1: error: no type named >'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' >SCOPED(CERTCertificate); > > > >- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
I am looking at, for 4.2.0, having our target set to 10.9, instead of 10.7, which helps a lot. > On Aug 15, 2017, at 9:39 AM, Peter kovacs wrote: > > Boost has name collision with c++11. > Switch the standard of. Then you have better chances I think. > > Am 15. August 2017 14:22:50 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski : >> Just starting replaying w/ building 4.2.0 on macOS and ran into >> this: >> >> error: no type named 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' >> >> but the rub is that we for sure specify c++11 as we should: >> >> /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang++ >> -arch x86_64 -std=c++11 -arch x86_64 -o out/der_getint_unittest.o -c >> -O2 -fPIC -fno-common -pipe -DDARWIN -DHAVE_STRERROR -DHAVE_BSD_FLOCK >> -Wall -Qunused-arguments -Wno-parentheses-equality -Wno-array-bounds >> -Wno-unevaluated-expression -Werror -Wsign-compare -DXP_UNIX -UDEBUG >> -DNDEBUG -DNSS_NO_INIT_SUPPORT -DUSE_UTIL_DIRECTLY -DNO_NSPR_10_SUPPORT >> -DSSL_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_CIPHER_SUITE_NAMES >> -I../../external_tests/google_test/gtest/include >> -I../../external_tests/common -I../../../dist/out/include >> -I../../../dist/public/nss -I../../../dist/private/nss >> -I../../../dist/public/nspr -I../../../dist/public/nss >> -I../../../dist/public/libdbm -I../../../dist/public/gtest -std=c++0x >> der_getint_unittest.cc >> In file included from der_getint_unittest.cc:14: >> ../../external_tests/common/scoped_ptrs.h:36:1: error: no type named >> 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' >> SCOPED(CERTCertificate); >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
Oh cool! Am 15. August 2017 15:45:05 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski : >I am looking at, for 4.2.0, having our target set to 10.9, instead >of 10.7, which helps a lot. > >> On Aug 15, 2017, at 9:39 AM, Peter kovacs wrote: >> >> Boost has name collision with c++11. >> Switch the standard of. Then you have better chances I think. >> >> Am 15. August 2017 14:22:50 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski >: >>> Just starting replaying w/ building 4.2.0 on macOS and ran into >>> this: >>> >>> error: no type named 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' >>> >>> but the rub is that we for sure specify c++11 as we should: >>> >>> >/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang++ >>> -arch x86_64 -std=c++11 -arch x86_64 -o out/der_getint_unittest.o -c >>> -O2 -fPIC -fno-common -pipe -DDARWIN -DHAVE_STRERROR >-DHAVE_BSD_FLOCK >>> -Wall -Qunused-arguments -Wno-parentheses-equality -Wno-array-bounds >>> -Wno-unevaluated-expression -Werror -Wsign-compare -DXP_UNIX -UDEBUG >>> -DNDEBUG -DNSS_NO_INIT_SUPPORT -DUSE_UTIL_DIRECTLY >-DNO_NSPR_10_SUPPORT >>> -DSSL_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_CIPHER_SUITE_NAMES >>> -I../../external_tests/google_test/gtest/include >>> -I../../external_tests/common -I../../../dist/out/include >>> -I../../../dist/public/nss -I../../../dist/private/nss >>> -I../../../dist/public/nspr -I../../../dist/public/nss >>> -I../../../dist/public/libdbm -I../../../dist/public/gtest >-std=c++0x >>> der_getint_unittest.cc >>> In file included from der_getint_unittest.cc:14: >>> ../../external_tests/common/scoped_ptrs.h:36:1: error: no type named >>> 'unique_ptr' in namespace 'std' >>> SCOPED(CERTCertificate); >>> >>> >>> >>> >- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > >- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
This was based on my understanding that starting w/ 4.2.0, AOO required 10.9/Mavericks or greater. If not correct, could someone let me know :) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
On 15/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: This was based on my understanding that starting w/ 4.2.0, AOO required 10.9/Mavericks or greater. Required based on what? On the current trunk code, on some architectural limitations, on build environment? We are still receiving the occasional mails of 10.6 users who can't run OpenOffice 4.1.x on their old Mac... Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
The build warnings and errors using any SDK older than 10.9 on trunk. > On Aug 16, 2017, at 12:03 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > On 15/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: >> This was based on my understanding that starting w/ 4.2.0, AOO >> required 10.9/Mavericks or greater. > > Required based on what? On the current trunk code, on some architectural > limitations, on build environment? We are still receiving the occasional > mails of 10.6 users who can't run OpenOffice 4.1.x on their old Mac... > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
On 16/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: The build warnings and errors using any SDK older than 10.9 on trunk. Is this a build requirement or will it affect end users too? I mean, does building with the 10.9 SDK imply that users using Mac OS X < 10.9 won't be able to run the program? A note: we'll have to make similar discussion for Linux too, as I said, but I think it's more appropriate to focus on 4.1.4 for the time being. Still, if we accompany 4.1.4 with a statement such as "This is the last OpenOffice version that is expected to work on [list of outdated operating systems]" it could be useful to users. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
On 17.08.2017 12:51, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 16/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: >> The build warnings and errors using any SDK older than 10.9 on trunk. > > Is this a build requirement or will it affect end users too? I mean, does > building with the 10.9 > SDK imply that users using Mac OS X < 10.9 won't be able to run the program? The latest updates of Xcode and its clang may give you warnings like: "lisbstdc++ is deprecated; move to libc++ with a minimum deployment target of OS X 10.9 [-Wdeprecated]". "OS X 10.9" nick name is "Maverick" and was released on 2013-02-22. Setting the environment variable "MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.9" will usually make the build unusable for earlier versions of MacOSX. > A note: we'll have to make similar discussion for Linux too, as I said, but I > think it's more > appropriate to focus on 4.1.4 for the time being. Still, if we accompany > 4.1.4 with a statement > such as "This is the last OpenOffice version that is expected to work on > [list of outdated > operating systems]" it could be useful to users. ---rony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
> On Aug 17, 2017, at 6:51 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > On 16/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: >> The build warnings and errors using any SDK older than 10.9 on trunk. > > Is this a build requirement or will it affect end users too? I mean, does > building with the 10.9 SDK imply that users using Mac OS X < 10.9 won't be > able to run the program? > It does... Now I haven't tried building w/ the 10.7 SDK simply because due to the build flags (-Werror -Wdeprecated) when we bump into issues the build stops. So we could work around those build issue, but that seem wonky to me. It just seems wrong to have a new build system and then immediately start crippling it to work with old systems. Alternatively, as the VCL Quicktime issue shows, as we start updating some of the actual code, these issues will start cropping up even more. At some point we need to drop support for old systems... I had assumed that 4.2.0 was our start in trying to free ourselves from some of that kruft. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS
Am 17.08.2017 um 14:06 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Aug 17, 2017, at 6:51 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 16/08/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: The build warnings and errors using any SDK older than 10.9 on trunk. Is this a build requirement or will it affect end users too? I mean, does building with the 10.9 SDK imply that users using Mac OS X < 10.9 won't be able to run the program? It does... Now I haven't tried building w/ the 10.7 SDK simply because due to the build flags (-Werror -Wdeprecated) when we bump into issues the build stops. So we could work around those build issue, but that seem wonky to me. It just seems wrong to have a new build system and then immediately start crippling it to work with old systems. Alternatively, as the VCL Quicktime issue shows, as we start updating some of the actual code, these issues will start cropping up even more. At some point we need to drop support for old systems... I had assumed that 4.2.0 was our start in trying to free ourselves from some of that kruft. sure, this was always the plan: To re-think what we really need nowadays. E.g., no support for old *) systems. *) What "old" and "system" means in detail for us needs of course tbd. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if we drop some older supported platforms. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
Jim Jagielski wrote: I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if we drop some older supported platforms. We should focus on 4.1.4 until the release process is complete. And then we should start a proper discussion (that I'll be very happy to participate in, since my list of pending, realistic, proposals is getting longer and longer!) about the next release. Its outcome will define how big a scope 4.2.0 has. And at that point, we can see whether it is more appropriate to number it 4.2.0, or 5.0, or 6.0, or 2018, or whatever. Until we don't know what goes into it, just tossing a number is a futile exercise. If we don't have consensus on many changes, 4.2.0 will still be OK. If instead we have consensus on a significant number of changes, even numbering it 4.5.0 might be restrictive. As in all sane communities, this depends on discussion. I'm really looking forward to starting it next week. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
> On Oct 9, 2017, at 7:15 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the >> way straight to 4.5.0... >> Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a >> bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if >> we drop some older supported platforms. > > We should focus on 4.1.4 until the release process is complete. It's called striking while the iron is hot ;) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
Hi - It is worth letting the idea “percolate” while 4.1.4 release proceeds to completion. I like Jm’s thought. Announcing plans while announcing a release and then executing on it would be the the best AOO marketing possible. We proceed with whoever helps methodically. My 2cts. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > >> On Oct 9, 2017, at 7:15 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >> >> Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the >>> way straight to 4.5.0... >>> Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a >>> bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if >>> we drop some older supported platforms. >> >> We should focus on 4.1.4 until the release process is complete. > > It's called striking while the iron is hot ;) > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
4.2.0 the idea is we could reference it to Douglas Adams answer 42. Which is kinda funny. However I would like to postpone the discussion towards 20ties since I have .ore time then. Very unselfish of me I know. ;) All the best Peter Am 10. Oktober 2017 01:00:36 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski : >I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the >way straight to 4.5.0... > >Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a >bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if >we drop some older supported platforms. > >- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
Am 10.10.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Jim Jagielski wrote: I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if we drop some older supported platforms. We should focus on 4.1.4 until the release process is complete. And then we should start a proper discussion (that I'll be very happy to participate in, since my list of pending, realistic, proposals is getting longer and longer!) about the next release. strong +1 To be honest, we have enough to do to get our 4.1.x release out. Therefore I doubt we should invest a single minute into the version numbering for the next but one release as it is not yet relevant. my 2 ct. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.5.0? (Was: Re: AOO 4.2.0 and macOS)
On 10/10/2017 11:49 AM, Marcus wrote: Am 10.10.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Jim Jagielski wrote: I was wondering... what do people think about going from 4.1.x all the way straight to 4.5.0... Since this next "major" release is pretty major, maybe a bigger step in number might be justified. Especially if we drop some older supported platforms. We should focus on 4.1.4 until the release process is complete. And then we should start a proper discussion (that I'll be very happy to participate in, since my list of pending, realistic, proposals is getting longer and longer!) about the next release. strong +1 To be honest, we have enough to do to get our 4.1.x release out. Therefore I doubt we should invest a single minute into the version numbering for the next but one release as it is not yet relevant. my 2 ct. Marcus +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org