| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ursusarctos
n00b
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 47
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:35 pm Post subject: Anyone tried a full compile of openoffice? |
 |
|
| I'm just wondering if anyone has tried compiling openoffice from source on the amd64 platform. I've seen discussions on bugs.gentoo.org regarding how best to get openoffice-bin to work (generally involving telling it to install without using sandbox), but the site is conspicuously quiet regarding the full compile....any comments or things to be aware of before I tweak the ebuild and think good thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
scoobydu
Veteran
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
Posts: 1076
Location: 'Mind the Gap'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From what I can tell, the OpenOffice branch cws_src680_ooo20040225 is where the current patches for x86_64 have been going, and I had a go at building that branch... it fails.
Currently it dies here:
| Code: | Making: ../../unxlngx4.pro/obj/interlck.obj
gcc -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../inc -I../../unx/inc -I../../unxlngx4.pro/inc -I. -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solver/680/unxlngx4.pro/inc/dont_use_stl -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solver/680/unxlngx4.pro/inc/external -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solver/680/unxlngx4.pro/inc -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solenv/unxlngx4/inc -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solenv/inc -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/res -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solver/680/unxlngx4.pro/inc/dont_use_stl -I/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/solenv/inc/Xp31 -I/opt/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2_rc1/include -I/opt/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2_rc1/include/linux -I/opt/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2_rc1/include/native_threads/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I. -I../../res -I. -O -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fno-use-cxa-atexit -fPIC -DLINUX -DUNX -DVCL -DGCC -DC300 -DX86_64 -DGXX_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/lib/gcc-lib/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/3.3.3/include/g++-v3 -DCVER=C300 -D_USE_NAMESPACE -DGLIBC=2 -DX86_64 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNEW_SOLAR -D_USE_NAMESPACE=1 -DSTLPORT_VERSION=400 -D__DMAKE -DUNIX -DCPPU_ENV=gcc3 -DSUPD=680 -DBUILD=8741 -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG -DPRODUCT_FULL -DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=0 -DOPTIMIZE -DEXCEPTIONS_OFF -DCUI -DSOLAR_JAVA -DSRC680 -DMULTITHREAD -w -o ../../unxlngx4.pro/obj/interlck.o interlck.c
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:8: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:10: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:11: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:21: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:23: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:24: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../unxlngx4.pro/obj/interlck.obj'
---* TG_SLO.MK *---
ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making /var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.1.1e/work/oo_1.1.1e_src/sal/osl/unx
!!! ERROR: app-office/openoffice-1.1.1e failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 390, Exitcode 1
!!! Build failed! |
Since this is the branch that I gather is to be OO2.0, I suspect it's not going to appear anytime soon, also from what I can tell, x86_64 porting is not being driven hard, although it's hard to know other that what can be found on google or in the OO bug tracking database. Seems there is a lack of machines to build and test on.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeHacker84
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 68
Location: Rapids of Cedar, IA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, what the heck, what else are we going to do in our spare time? I know I don't have anything better to do, and I'd like to learn how this thing works. *shrugs* No harm in trying...unless you crash your system so bad that you have to format/re-install...and that's what Gentoo is all about, anyway  , learning from your mistakes.
_________________
Athlon64 3200
1GB Corsair PC3200 C2
MSI K8T Neo FIS2R
CoolerMaster WaveMaster (Black)
Antec TruePower 550W
120 GB WD SATA Drive
160 GB WD PATA Drive
54x32x54 CD-R/RW
Dual head: ATI 9800 AiW/LG1720P && Voodoo3 PCI/IBM G40 CRT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ursusarctos
n00b
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 47
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I finally decided to keep the computer busy so that I could study without distraction, only to find that the openoffice ebuild in portage is not intended for amd64 use. When I tried a compile, it died in the first stages of configuration.
Also, it seems that the developers are updating their lists of "what software *won't work*" at http://amd64.gentoo.org It seems that this is the outgrowth of Brad's tech notes, and it's highly useful. This may already be common knowledge, but I wasn't aware of it.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kosan
n00b
Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | {standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:8: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:10: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:11: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:21: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:23: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:24: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../unxlngx4.pro/obj/interlck.obj'
---* TG_SLO.MK *--- |
Well if you want to start working on getting it to compile you can start here, look in that file and on all those lines it will start with something like pushl $255, %rax or something similar, just change all the pushl or popl or compl or whatever to pushq, popq, copq or whatever it is and that will fix those problems.
Although i am sure you don't want to wade through the millions of lines of code doing that, then recompiling, then fixing the next thing etc, but i am sure the openoffice team will get around to it sometime, it just depends on how long we want to wait.
-Chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeHacker84
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 68
Location: Rapids of Cedar, IA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unfortunately, if everyone has that attitude, the developer base is going to get really small.  My philosophy is that if you want something done, you should learn to do it yourself. That's basically what this OS is all about.  I know I'm gonna try to get some of my ideas implemented. I think I've mentioned it before, but I'll mention it again: it seems to me that what we need is a 64/32 bit hybrid kernel that can make use of the 32-bit packages already in existence. My thoughts are that the hardware abstractions of system calls should insulate us from having to do much work if we can just get a 64-bit kernel to run 32-bit modules. This, of course, is a problem if there isn't a way to switch the 64-bit Athlon64 into 32-bit mode on the fly  , but I seem to recall that there's a way to do this. I'll be looking into it. 
[Edit]Besides, the truth is that I'm one of those tech-nerds who actually [i]doesn't[i] have anything better to do than spend time looking at source code. [/Edit]
_________________
Athlon64 3200
1GB Corsair PC3200 C2
MSI K8T Neo FIS2R
CoolerMaster WaveMaster (Black)
Antec TruePower 550W
120 GB WD SATA Drive
160 GB WD PATA Drive
54x32x54 CD-R/RW
Dual head: ATI 9800 AiW/LG1720P && Voodoo3 PCI/IBM G40 CRT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kosan
n00b
Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Unfortunately, if everyone has that attitude, the developer base is going to get really small. |
I usually try to stay away from trolls but just to clarify the attitude i had.
| Quote: | | Well if you want to start working on getting it to compile you can start here, |
Ok so i started off by addressing the problem that they were facing and giving a start of how to start looking
| Quote: | | Although i am sure you don't want to wade through the millions of lines of code doing that |
Then i acknoledged the fact that OO.org is a HUGH code base and will take a lot of work to port over which many individuals don't have time for (read i don't have time for)
| Quote: | | but i am sure the openoffice team will get around to it sometime |
So some day it probably will get ported over
| Quote: | | it just depends on how long we want to wait. |
But if you (we... anyone) want to get it ported more quickly then you will have to go through the millions of lines of code and put the effort in yourself.
I'm sorry i was unclear on my _attitude_ in my original post. Let me rephrase what i was trying to say to be more clear. If you want to get OO.org to run natively on x86_64 then it will take some serious effort and a place to start is the post up above, if you don't want to do the work yourself then chances are it will get done by someone else eventually but if you want it done now then do it.
Sorry to everyone for responding to a troll but i promise it won't happen again, i'll stop watching this thread so i'm not even baited.
-Chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm toying with it, and will continue to plod along, but my assembler days are from the 80s, and I am a crude hack when it comes to C, and the problem appears to be the inline assembly code, I've been hunting around for similar code that may be working... no luck yet.
OO is a big fat project, and a lot to digest, I've grabbed a copy from CVS, if more of you want to play with it, I'd be glad to post every thing I know so far, and what bit's of resources I've found in my quest to get a x86_64 build of OO.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kosan wrote: |
But if you (we... anyone) want to get it ported more quickly then you will have to go through the millions of lines of code and put the effort in yourself.
|
Actually you don't have to go through it all, so far I've found a few issues, and not a lot of actual code browsing, although it could get that way.. Anyway, the port to x86_64 is taking place, so the biggest issues are going to be finding build stoppers, and if noone builds it, it will take longer for them (the OO folks) to find and fix the serious problems, as I don't see much evidence of x86_64 building going on.
For anyone who wants to toy with OO, here's the FIRST tip.
emerge sync
if you have dev-java/ant-1.6.0-r3 installed, unmerge it, it's borked.
emerge dev-java/ant-1.5.4-r1
ant is going to be required for the 2.0 version of OO, thus needed for CVS builds.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And for those who really want to get their hand dirty:
%rax is a temporary rergister; with variable arguments passes information about the number of SSE registers used; 1st return register.
Info found in the following link:
http://www.x86-64.org/documentation/documentation/abi.pdf
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brad_mssw
n00b
Joined: 24 Dec 2003
Posts: 29
Location: Alachua, FL
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just an FYI, there are some maintained patches for
OOo2 on x86_64 (AMD64) here:
http://ftp.linux.cz/pub/localization/OpenOffice.org/devel/build/
I have yet to attempt to get that to work (recently anyhow, I
tried a long time ago, but didn't have any time to dedicate to
it).
If anyone successfully builds it, let me know. Also, let me know the
full details of what you did, I'd like to get an ebuild up for OOo2
on amd64 if possible, I just don't have time to dedicate to it right
now (in actuality, I don't use my amd64 as a desktop, so I don't have
a personal need for it, otherwise, I'd probably already have it working).
-Brad House
AMD64 Project Lead
brad_mssw@gentoo.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've downloaded all of those patches and most of them apply clean to the cws_src680_ooo20040225 branch, those that did not were already merged into the branch.
The STLport-4.5.3.patch still needs to be added (from the 1.1.1b ebuild)
I'm spending weekends and spare time poking at it.
I've hacked up the 1.1.1b ebuild, and have been using that to test with.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lynggaard
n00b
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kosan wrote: | | Quote: | {standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:8: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:10: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:11: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:21: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:23: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
{standard input}:24: Error: Incorrect register `%rax' used with `l' suffix
dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../unxlngx4.pro/obj/interlck.obj'
---* TG_SLO.MK *--- |
Well if you want to start working on getting it to compile you can start here, look in that file and on all those lines it will start with something like pushl $255, %rax or something similar, just change all the pushl or popl or compl or whatever to pushq, popq, copq or whatever it is and that will fix those problems.
Although i am sure you don't want to wade through the millions of lines of code doing that, then recompiling, then fixing the next thing etc, but i am sure the openoffice team will get around to it sometime, it just depends on how long we want to wait.
-Chris |
Instead of Trying to fix all these assembler issues. I think it might just be picking up the wrong JDK/JRE to compile, because blackdown has released an AMD64 version, which makes me think this has been fixed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeHacker84
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 68
Location: Rapids of Cedar, IA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And I didn't actually mean to troll anyone, I was just stating a fact.
_________________
Athlon64 3200
1GB Corsair PC3200 C2
MSI K8T Neo FIS2R
CoolerMaster WaveMaster (Black)
Antec TruePower 550W
120 GB WD SATA Drive
160 GB WD PATA Drive
54x32x54 CD-R/RW
Dual head: ATI 9800 AiW/LG1720P && Voodoo3 PCI/IBM G40 CRT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm using dev-java/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2_rc1 for amd64, I installed it before any of the emulation libs... Still could be an issue with it, or GCC, or the kernel...
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ectospasm
l33t
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 711
Location: Mobile, AL, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thumper wrote: | I've downloaded all of those patches and most of them apply clean to the cws_src680_ooo20040225 branch, those that did not were already merged into the branch.
The STLport-4.5.3.patch still needs to be added (from the 1.1.1b ebuild)
I'm spending weekends and spare time poking at it.
I've hacked up the 1.1.1b ebuild, and have been using that to test with.
George |
I don't have my Opteron machine yet, but I intend to help when I get it. And since I've never done real development work before, you'll have to tell me what to do. (-:
_________________
Join the adopt an unanswered post initiative today
Join the EFF!
Join the Drug Policy Alliance! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What time frame am I looking at?
I'll work on a write up from getting the cvs to portage overlays and building if thats the kind of stuff you need.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ectospasm
l33t
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 711
Location: Mobile, AL, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thumper
Guru
Joined: 06 Dec 2002
Posts: 554
Location: Venice FL
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
HA!
it was a 64bit issue, this patch will fix the interlck.c problem, it should be done properly so it won't break x86, but thats another day:
| Code: | darkstar unx # diff -u interlck.c-orig interlck.c
--- interlck.c-orig 2004-03-03 20:57:59.798004544 -0500
+++ interlck.c 2004-03-03 20:56:38.577351960 -0500
@@ -80,10 +80,10 @@
oslInterlockedCount nCount;
__asm__ __volatile__ (
- "movl $1, %0\n\t"
+ "movq $1, %0\n\t"
"lock\n\t"
- "xaddl %0, %2\n\t"
- "incl %0"
+ "xaddq %0, %2\n\t"
+ "incq %0"
: "=&r" (nCount), "=m" (*pCount)
: "m" (*pCount)
: "memory");
@@ -96,10 +96,10 @@
oslInterlockedCount nCount;
__asm__ __volatile__ (
- "movl $-1, %0\n\t"
+ "movq $-1, %0\n\t"
"lock\n\t"
- "xaddl %0, %2\n\t"
- "decl %0"
+ "xaddq %0, %2\n\t"
+ "decq %0"
: "=&r" (nCount), "=m" (*pCount)
: "m" (*pCount)
: "memory"); |
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo on AMD64
