On 7 Feb, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hi Damjan;
>
> Looking at the log I was wondering what exactly clang 1.8 was and
> I took the liberty of fixing the mismatch ;).
>
> FWIW, AOO should now work fine with clang 3.9.1. Clang 4 reveals
> allocation issues.
Clang 4 on x86_64 uses a MOVAPS SSE
Hi Damjan;
Looking at the log I was wondering what exactly clang 1.8 was and
I took the liberty of fixing the mismatch ;).
FWIW, AOO should now work fine with clang 3.9.1. Clang 4 reveals
allocation issues. If someone is wondering why we/you should be using
clang, note that the FreeBSD buildbot
Am 27.01.2017 um 22:22 schrieb Marcus:
This post with patches doesn't got a reply until now. So, please can a
developer have a look?
Thanks a lot
@Patricia, Damjan, Ariel:
Please can you have a look? It's not often that we get problem reports
with attached patches to solve this. So, we
Hi
As of r1782030, AOO is successfully building with Clang 3.8 on Ubuntu 16.04
on x86 :-).
Other architectures might work - I did add changes for all of them, but
main/bridges uses dodgy low level C++ ABI hacks that (recent?) Clang
doesn't like. If so, please report back with the Clang version
> From: Pedro [mailto:pedro.l...@openmailbox.org]
> Even if you can increase the number of sheets, the most important
> question is: does ODF support this?
I would have to check, but I do not violate the LO / TDF against the ODF
standard.
> Regarding how many sheets: why doesn't AOO let the
In case (a), the table number should be increased _in the short term_,
for example to 1024. (more is better, but 1024 would already be a good
value for now)
Even if you can increase the number of sheets, the most important
question is: does ODF support this?
Regarding how many sheets: why