Building LibreOffice on Windows

Tor Lillqvist tml at
Mon Feb 20 07:42:11 PST 2012

> I think that is oversimplifying things quite a bit.

Well, what isn't? Excuse me for writing quick emails without spending
a week researching first.

> While there are some
> stability issues with cygwin

"some" stability issues?

> when combined with evil Windows necessities like
> in-memory-virusscanners, the slowness is primarily a result of the abysmal
> windows filesystem performance.

And the slowness of Cygwin's  forking and executing the various Perl,
shell and whatnot processes involved in each file being compiled (note
the pipe to has nothing to do with it?

> And the compiling stuff is not really the hard
> part when we talk about a windows baseline -- it is stuff like the l10n
> tooling, awk, Perl, etc.. If you believe those problems to magically go away
> when using the native implementations instead of the cygwin ones, you are very
> naive and you would make setting up the build environment even more complex.

I hope you aren't talking to me here; of course I am very aware of
these issues, and would not recommend even bothering trying. After
all, letting them work on "improving the build system" has been a good
way to have contributors lose interest in the past... (but for some
reason the gbuild attempt was successful, yay!)

> The reason why simple compiles on Windows are so slow has nothing to do with
> the tooling around it -- it is because we are not using that obnoxious
> 'precompiled headers' cheat that makes C++ compilation times on Windows
> almost bearable.

And this is not oversimplifying?

Talking about stuff that doesn't work, and nobody is interested in
working on to make work, is fairly Irrelevant, isn't it?


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list