Re: Mac OS X 64-bit, libstdc++ vs. libc++

On 01/17/2014 10:02 AM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> Now, the good news appears to be that "Libc++ is specifically designed
> so that you can use it in the same process as libstdc++."
> [<http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Adopting-libc-hitting-problems-on-Mac-OS-X-td4027011.html>]
>   That means that it hopefully works to stick with libstdc++ for LO 4.2
> (and avoid any trouble switching this late in the release schedule),
> switch to libc++ for LO 4.3 say, and expect any native extensions using
> either of the two libraries to work with both flavors of LO.  (And,
> given the assumption that Apple will eventually discontinue the support
> of libstdc++, recommend that native extensions---which there are none
> yet for Mac OS X 64-bit---use libc++.)

So I built an extension (the SDK's examples/cpp/complextoolbarcontrols) 
containing a native UNO component using libc++, and installed that into 
<http://donate.libreoffice.org/home/dl/mac-x86_64/4.2.0/en-US/LibreOffice_4.2.0.2_MacOS_x86-64.dmg> 
(using libstdc++), and everything works fine.  So I still think we are 
safe to keep LO 4.2.0 at libstdc++ and recommend libc++ for extensions.

Apropos SDK, doing the above made me aware that the SDK for Mac OS X 
64-bit is broken, in that its settings/settings.mk assumes building for 
a 32-bit LO. 
<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=e5ad31e2f784856506c28092166dc8704c84e868> 
"Fix Mac OS X 64 bit SDK settings.mk" fixes that on master, but it 
depdns on 
<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=dea0398ee24eb278cdb14999efbf34d634454eaa> 
"SDK settings.mk: Don't guess PLATFORM/PROCTYPE," which I would feel 
uneasy to backport to libreoffice-4-2-0 at this stage.  (I haven't even 
been able to test that master change on Windows yet.)

Therefore, I would suggest to stay with a broken Mac OS X 64-bit SDK for 
LO 4.2.0 and only backport those fixes to libreoffice-4-2 towards LO 
4.2.1.  Other opinions?

Stephan