Why can't gcc-4.2.1 build usable libreoffice?

[Greg Miller]

On 2/21/13, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
>
>
> On 21.02.13 04:23, Greg Miller wrote:
>> I can't speak for the OP, but I tried it because clang, gcc46, and
>> gcc47 wouldn't produce a working executable at all for a long time
>> (and continue to fail) on my 9.0 and 9.1 systems. There's been so much
>> libreoffice breakage that I don't even bother reporting it or making
>> much effort to fix it. I just reboot to Windows for the cases where I
>> need a working libreoffice. I don't much care whether gcc 4.2 produces
>> a working libreoffice; I just wish something did.
>
> Did you build the Windows version yourself from source?
>
> If not, why you just don't get the binary WhateverOffice for FreeBSD and
> be done with this "problem"? That will surely save you the reboots. At
> least.

One reason I moved from Linux to FreeBSD many years ago was to get
away from binary dependency hell, so I've been reluctant to try any
large binary packages in quite a while.

In any case, some people in the thread wanted to know why others try
to build with something other than the default compiler, and one of
the answers is "it doesn't build with the default compiler, at least
for some of us." If you have a problem with that, you'll just have to
live with it.