Some Issues regarding Debian versus OOo versions and Support?
Hi,
I took a peak at the debian-openoffice mailing list via the mailing list
archives and noticed a few things and wondered if you could answer some
questions for me:
1. Why are you disabling the mozilla addressbook builds. They are easy to
do just by building mozilla-0.9.5 and making some zip archives. I once
explained the steps to do this and I could propbably find them in the OOo
mailing list if need be.
2. Why remove support for gpc without creating a replacement? Again is
this a license difficulty? If so, why, you are not making a profit from
the sale of Debian so what license violation is there?
3. Why remove java from the build? Is this again a license issue. You
are allowed to ship Sun/Blackdown jres along with OOo. There are
Blackdown Debian java packages that can be used for the build itself.
Will you allow Java's use or are you disabling it in the setup process?
Given all of the changes you have made which limit the product, how are
you going to differentiate your builds against the real OpenOffice.org
builds which has these features. Please don't call it OpenOffice.org 1.0
and release it for PPC Linux otherwise it will confuse people who have
been looking to use the version I have been releasing over the last year
or two. Perhaps adding something along the lines of Debian to the name?
There is a difference between packaging up something and changing it
enough to cause confusion among users.
But since I bear the brunt of all bug reports involving PPC Linux, I
really don't want to have problems with your releases coming to me for
support. So I need some way to identify them so that I can point them to
your team.
Or will someone in your group be formally joining the PPC Linux effort at
OpenOffice.org to take over handling Issuezillas filed by users involving
your builds. There already have been a number of bug reports involving
strange bugs, glibc 2.2.4 issues, etc with Debian unstable users that I
have tried to help on.
But I simply do not have the time to support any one else's builds but my
own (which as volunteers I think you can understand ;-)
So how do you want to handle those issues. Should I be redirecting all
Issuezilla's involving Debian PPC Linux users to your mailing list or will
someone from your team be joining OOo formally to help with bug tracking
and fixes for Debian users (obviously the latter is much better!).
Please let me know what you decide.
Thanks,
Kevin
On April 19, 2002 04:12, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
> Hi all ...
>
> I wanted to build OpenOffice.org again on Linux, debian-unstable, with
> (I know I should not do it) gcc3.
>
> I tried to compile and had to drop the -nostdinc cflag in the
> unxlgppc.mak.
> To compile oo_src/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc2_linux_ppc I got some
> errors with undeclared variables, because, I compile with gcc3. For
> example, this:
>
> /home/palic/OpenOffice/debian/openoffice.org-0.641d.cvs20020418/build-tr
>ee/oo_stable1_cvs20020418_src/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc2_linux_powerpc/u
>no2cpp.cxx: In
> function `Void gcc3::callVirtualMethod(void*, long int, void*,
> _typelib_TypeClass, char*, sal_Int32*, long int, uno_Any**,
> uno_Mapping*)':
> /home/palic/OpenOffice/debian/openoffice.org-0.641d.cvs20020418/build-tr
>ee/oo_stable1_cvs20020418_src/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc2_linux_powerpc/u
>no2cpp.cxx:309: ^_cp_eh_info'
> undeclared (first use this function) ....
>
> but _cp_eh_info is declared in the gcc2_linux_ppc.hxx, but I think,
> dmake does not recognize it.
>
> Are there any work to fix it? Are there patches, which can be tested?
>
> Kevin, do you have something for me? :)))
>
> Regards
> Jan
> PS: I attached the whole errormessages.....
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-openoffice-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: