Re: test Debian packages of openoffice
Hello!
Jan-Hendrik Palic <jan.palic@linux-debian.de> writes:
> I'm not a debian-maintainer, but I will become on soon, I hope.
>
> But ...
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 11:30:41PM +0400, Peter Novodvorsky wrote:
> >I've managed to build debian packages of openoffice. Build and install
> >process is completely uninteractive and doesn't real xserver running.
> >That's because of Xvfb and autoresponse solutions. (I'm not using
> >XTest of course).
>
> Hmmm .. ok .. ok ...
>
> I'm fully disagree with your package. Didn't I see a mail, in what you
> said, that you intent to pack OpenOffice, too?
Yes, you've seen, that is the mail you replied to.
>
> I mean, we had have work together, we were discussing on
> debian-openoffice, how we pack OpenOffice and you did it and you did
> nothing, we discussed it.
Sorry, couldn't parse you phrase. As I see, you still don't have any
packages and no real progress. ;-(
>
> But worst thing, IMHO, one deb for the whole OpenOffice, that's heavy!
Yes, I don't like it too. But it isn't final release, true? Now we can
do tweaking, etc. In fact I'l show you come calculations:
Openoffice installed 232M
Help and other arch-indep 30M
Jar files(will be excluded) 2.1M
So files (libraries) 180M
Rdb Files 7M
Everything else ...
So, if we install one of highlevel openoffice apps, it requires all rdb
files and mostly all libraries. So it's already ~170M. When you get
arch-independant files you get 200M. So for one application you will
install whole OpenOffice! Why won't we put it in one package?
>
> >I've saw ITP onopenoffice by Noel Koethe, Clay Crouch and Adrian Bunk.
> >Are you still trying to build openoffice in a package? is it ok, if I'll
> >ITP it too and upload?
>
> You forgotten me, I did an ITP to ....
>
> >>> retitle 101762 ITP: openoffice >>> Bug#101762: RFP: openoffice -- The OpenOffice office suite.
> >>> Changed Bug title.
I'm sorry, I was wrong :(
>
> >Okey, the diff.gz is here[1], it requires libstlport4.0[-dev]. Debian
> >has only 4.1 packages. You can find stlport4.0 diffs here[2]. You'll need
> >j2sdk1.3 from blackdown.org. I couldn't upload binary because of small
> >bandwidth.
>
> You know, JDK is highly non-free and not in debian. Its only in
> incoming. So, if OpenOffice comes in an autobuilder, it will not be
> build, because, JDK is not able to be installed by apt.
True.
>
> My thought of OpenOffice was:
>
> We grap trough the source and makes it compileable on as much as
> possible on several arches. Therefor, we have to wait for gcc-3.0
> support. Actually, the source 638c does not kompile with gcc-3.0,
> libstlport-4.0 doesn't kompile with gcc-3.0, too.
> The next thing, I want is, that we became JDK-independent with
> OpenOffice and gpc-indipendent, because, OpenOffice will depend on this,
> and it will not came into main. But to get the whole Debian- Support,
> OpenOffice should came into main, this means a lot of work.
Do you agree that we need to have some working version that we can edit?
>
> And last but not least, I don't want to download a 180MB debian-package.
It's only 71 MB :).
> OpenOffice is modular, so we should work with it and provide smaller
> OpenOfficepackages!
Car is also modular, but every part of it depends on another part (did
you see sources of openoffice :)).
>
> >Package uses doogie build system so it will be easy to work in team, if
> >you would like that.
>
> Hey .. what do you think, why we are discussing on debian-openoffice?
As I see you're not discussing that much. When I looked at mail archives
I thought: "These guys don't discuss anything, they can't even build
openoffice (I looked in august), I need to make a first package to
boost the progress". So did you have any progress in last two months?
>
> >Here is my TODO, I'd like to hear what you are working on, to distribute
> >our work.
>
> We are working on understanding the source and make it provideable for
> debian. Just in time, this peace of source is not providable for debian.
OK, if you can tell my _why_ do you think so, I'll agree.
> >- Divide everything in arch-dependant and arch independant parts
>
> I think, it would be better to see, which parts are in debian. IDL for
> example is right packaged in debian. I think, it is nessessary to have a
> look after parts in OpenOffice, which could be provided by well known
> libs in debian. This would debugging much easier... IMHO
In my packages libstlport and libgpcl are not in openoffice distribution
already.
>
> >- After previous step is done, start porting to other platforms. (It's
> >great that openoffice was ported to powerpc, yay!)
>
> No ... on the one Hand, the source must compileable with a compiler,
> which present on all arches, we have in debian. There are two or three
> of them working only with gcc-3.0. This source doesn't work on them :(.
Hmms... And untill then we won't make any packages, right ????
>
> To get it work is a thing of the OpenOffice - upstreamauthers.
> If they had have written ansi-code, it would not be a problem.
???
>
> But I have a discussion thread on openoffice-discuss about debian and
> OpenOffice.
OK, I'll see.
I'm Cc'ing to -devel, so other developers can give their word too.
For those who are not on -devel:
Openoffice is already packaged, but packaged badly, only one big binary.
I don't have enough bandwidth to upload whole thing, so these are diff
URL's needed (you'll need stlport4.0, and unstable has only 4.1):
http://people.altlinux.ru/nidd/stlport4.0_4.0-0.1.diff.gz
http://people.debian.org/~nidd/openoffice_0.638c-1.diff.gz
Bye,
--
Peter Novodvorsky http://www.altlinux.ru/ AltLinux Team, Russia
Debian.Org http://debian.org/~nidd
Debian --- no need to wait for tomorrow.
Reply to: