lang/gcc-ooo removal?

[Gerald Pfeifer]

Hi,

thanks for the nice and detailed explanation!

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, NAKATA Maho wrote:
> Again, criterion for buildability, Hamburg team uses that 
> gcc341+vis+enum. If, for some cws, build fails with that gcc, simply we 
> must go back fix them. But they welcome patches for gcc-3.3 regressions 
> and gcc-4.x syntax strictness. What that means? For every milestones, we 
> check them and fix them! That's why you think OOo is buildable with 
> gcc-3.3, 4.0 and 4.1. This is not automatic.

I fully understand and appreciate this effort, which certainly is not 
small an amount of work!  The one thing that puzzles me is that my 
employeer is the #2 contributor to OpenOffice, #1 behind Sun, and we
have not had nor needed such old versions of OpenOffice as far as I
can tell.

Rather, we are currently using GCC 4.1.x and this seems to meet our
needs sufficiently well.

>> On a related note, why do we need six(!) ports of OpenOffice in the
>> collection?
> No, seven ;)

Wow. =:-o

> * We can remove gcc-ooo dependency for openoffice.org-2 port. But not 
>   -devel port. Thus we cannot remove. How do you think?

My main motivation was getting rid of lang/gcc-ooo, and removing the 
dependency for openoffice.org-2 will be a welcome step in that direction.
Hopefully Sun will change policies at one point or something else happens
so that we can get rid of the final depdency later.

Thanks,
Gerald