Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 7102
FreeBSD port: Fix namespace collision in libpackage
Last modified: 2004-03-25 07:37:10 UTC
Fix gcc 2.95.3 crash resulting from a symbol conflict between libpackage2.so and libsvx641fi.so. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice/files/patch-package::inc::HashMaps.hxx http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice/files/patch-package::inc::ZipPackageFolder.hxx http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice/files/patch-package::source::zippackage::ContentInfo.hxx http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice/files/patch-package::source::zippackage::ZipPackageFolder.cxx
mh->mbr: as agreed retargeted to 1.0.4
Adding myself to CC. This is a MAJOR showstopper bug on Irix. Without a fix to this issue, OpenOffice will NOT run on Irix at all. Bacause both svx and package have a class named ContentInfo, and neither is in a namespace scope, OO will call the constructor from package, and the destructor from svx, which will try to access a piece of memory that does not exist, and..... crash! I have another patch for this which is a little neater, putting the ContenInfo class in package within a namespace scope. Martin, can you change: - the Platform and OS to all - and the issue type to DEFECT - and the priority to P1 please. George
Created attachment 5671 [details] patch for package/inc/HashMaps.hxx
Created attachment 5672 [details] Patch for package/inc/ZipPackageFolder.hxx
Created attachment 5673 [details] Patch for package/inc/ZipPackageFolder.hxx
Also see issue 13448, which Irix team is using for tracking purposes.
Can this please be bumped to a P1 bug, as without this OO.o will NOT run on Irix at all, and I have asked for this to be bumped to P1 several times before. Martin: I think you accidentally changed it to P4 rather than P1. Can someone approve this patch, as it really needs to go in 1.0.4
Raising priority... why hasn't this been checked in? its a simple fix, and a show stopper on IRIX (at least while we are dependant on gcc-2.95.3).
Hello, I found that this Issue is targetted to 1.0.4. Can you please retargetting this issue since 1.0.4 is not planned. maybe to 1.1.1 ? Thanks
This is already fixed in 1.1.1 (fix1).
*** Issue 13448 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
close issue.