[CC:ing debain-openoffice, may be interessant for others, too ]
Hi,
Alex Perry wrote:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2004/07/msg00216.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2004/07/msg00227.html
>
> This exchange was six months ago, and I can't find anything more recent
> using Google. Is there any status information about Debian pyuno around?
>
> The two mentioned bug entries haven't changed in ten months either ...
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=220226
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=232905
>
> There is mention of bringing up UNO for people using Bibus on Debian
> http://bibus-biblio.sourceforge.net/LinuxInstall.html
> so it's not clear to me whether we couldn't just package what they did.
> It seems to unpack and run reasonably well on Testing (i.e. OOo 1.1).
Right. The lack of a python-pyuno package is excatly the reason
mentioned in that bibus article below. (look for the ucs2 stuff=.
It'd build with python2.2 and
python2.3 but will not work with 2.3. And as I tried to make
policy-compliant package for python-pyuno I failed (puttting all stuff
in /usr/lib/openoffice/program is bad.)
OOo2 updates to python2.3 which gives us a bit hope that it may work
there (especially since they AFAIS don't use "special" configure options
to the included python...)
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature