[Top] [All Lists]

Re: About openoffice linux/mips porting

To: Thiemo Seufer <>
Subject: Re: About openoffice linux/mips porting
From: David Daney <>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:20:13 -0700
Cc: Fuxin Zhang <>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>, Fuxin Zhang <>,,
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20070719)
Thiemo Seufer wrote:
Fuxin Zhang wrote:
Maciej W. Rozycki ??????:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Fuxin Zhang wrote:

It is available at, any comments are
Have an official openoffice for linux/mips might be a good thing.

A quick glance revealed already several bugs. (alignment issues, ULH for
laoding signed shorts, etc.)

Hmm, why would anyone need to have asm snippets in a document processing suite? And it looks like the bits are ABI-dependent, so at least three variations (if the changes are endianness-safe) would be required to handle all the ABIs that we support.
Openoffice wants to be able to interact with plugins written in many languages, instead of writting a module for each possible combination it chooses the so called bridge: every language interact with a common middle language.

So we have now foreign function interfaces for at least OpenOffice, Mozilla,
Clisp and GCC's libffi. libffi recently got support for N32/N64 ABIs, and
is the only solution which isn't bound to a specific application (as long
as GCC is used).

Using libffi from Openoffice looks like the best long-term approach to me.

I assume you mean 'Using libffi in...'. I would tend to agree, but I am a bit biased toward libffi.

FWIW, GCC's libffi gets full n32/n64 support in version 4.3 (which has not been released yet) The libffi part seems quite stable though, so you could start experimenting with it now I suppose...

David Daney

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>