Re: plans with libmerged

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Michael Meeks <michael.meeks@suse.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 17:08 -0400, Peter Foley wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This  switch all/core/no sound pretty cool.
> > > Libreoffice is currently built with mergedlib enabled on opensuse and gentoo
> > > in production and there are no visible issues (currently master fails tests
> > > [so i turned off my tinderbox after having it fail for a week] but hey the
> > > app still runs fine).
> >
> > Right now libmerged seems to be causing very strange crashes in the unit tests.
> > I'm trying to figure out what exactly is going wrong, but any help
> > would be appreciated.
>
>         IMHO we really do need a small re-think here; the primary use-case I
> was aware of for libmerged is to enable more LTO, and faster start-up.
>
>         I rather suspect that merging all the components: base, writer, calc
> etc. into the libmerged may not help startup on lots of hardware; so I'm
> curious as to the plan there.
>
>         If we break the unit tests by doing that, almost certainly we'll break
> the run-time functionality too :-) so - prolly rather better to back
> that stuff out until it works. So I'll merge this:
>
>         https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/3280
>
>         Peter - any chance of tweaking your use-case to include those libraries
> that you want merged in there (assuming you do) conditionally with a
> non-default configure switch as Matus suggests ?

Michael,

I was under the impression that the goal of libmerged was to eventually include
most, if not all of the various libraries in libreoffice.
If this is incorrect, I'd like to know what libraries should and
should not be in libmerged?

Thanks,

Peter