Hi Josh,
Firstly, sorry to have taken a while to respond to you. I've been very busy
and then went on vacation. I haven't ignored your work and would love to
be able to get this into the packages.
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 01:29:35PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> With the attached patches, OpenOffice.org will build without a JDK
> installed.
The patchset that we share with Ximian is licensed the same as OOo itself,
to avoid problems for anyone who wants to make use of the patches, and to
help get patches integrated into the official OOo CVS without extra hurdles.
I don't see your name on the contributors list [1]. Please can you fill in
a JCA form [2] so that we can add your patches?
> + readlicense-oo-xsltproc.diff - Use xsltproc to replace java
> for xml transforms in readlicense_oo.
> + officecfg-xsltproc.diff - Use xsltproc to replace java for xml
> transforms in officecfg.
I see your comments '# FIXME: replace org.openoffice...'. Does this mean
that something is missing from the output generated using your patches? If
so, we could perhaps consider using Kaffe instead, if the FIXME is a lot of
work.
> + allow-no-jdk.diff - If java is disabled with --disable-java,
> don't abort the configure script if a JDK is not found.
It would be helpful to check for the tool used to do the xml processing
(xsltproc or Kaffe depending on the answer to the last question) and only
proceed if at least one tool is present.
> + solenv-set-solar-java-only-if-unset.diff - Set the SOLAR_JAVA
> variable conditionally with "*=".
Yes. Thanks for extending that for more architectures.
> + berkeleydb-handle-no-solar-java.diff - If SOLAR_JAVA is not set,
> don't pass --enable-java to the configure script, and don't
> expect the jar when finished.
There is a rumour that --enable-java isn't needed any more, even for a build
with SOLAR_JAVA set. I haven't tested this on a complete build yet.
> + jurt-handle-no-solar-java.diff - Don't build jpipe with
> SOLAR_JAVA not set.
I asked upstream about the style of makefile.mk we should use to not build
anything at all [3], and I was asked to try not to add an extra 'dummy'
target, but to enclose just the targets in a conditional, i.e.:
.IF "$(SOLAR_JAVA)"!=""
SLOFILES = \
$(SLO)$/com_sun_star_lib_connections_pipe_PipeConnection.obj
[..]
DEF1NAME=$(SHL1TARGET)
DEF1EXPORTFILE=$(TARGET).dxp
DEF1DES=jurtpipe
.ENDIF
.INCLUDE : target.mk
instead of enclosing the complete makefile in a conditional.
This is more of a style question - I don't mind adding these patches in
their current state to the patchset.
> * debian/rules
> + Removed --with-jdkhome and added --disable-java in configure
> invocation.
> + Don't look for jdkhome in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS.
> + Removed classpath from BUILDCMD.
> + Don't set JDK_HOME or test for javac in JDK_HOME.
> * debian/scripts/detect_java.sh - Deleted.
> * debian/setperms - Removed chmod of detect_java.sh.
I would have preferred this to be controllable by DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, with
Java support disabled by default instead of removing support completely. I
think there will still be demand for OOo built with Java for those wanting
to use the XML filters or accessibility. But again, that can come later
when someone wants to look at it. It might be useful to comment out the
relevant lines instead of deleting them completely, but I don't really mind
either way.
Thanks,
Chris
[1] http://www.openoffice.org/copyright/copyrightapproved.html
[2] http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/jca.pdf
[3] http://tools.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=774292&listName=dev
Attachment:
pgpEGXhdJz0PJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature