Hi Kevin ... On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 01:30:36PM -0400, Kevin B. Hendricks wrote: >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: I want to try to help you! >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. I remember that, but I cant find the mail :( Copiing the mozilla-0.9.5 files into oo_src is a change of orig.tar.gz, which is the original source from upstream .. from you! :) If we copy the files into it, to build OOo on PPC with mozilla, we will break with our policy ..... As workaround, I commented it out for PPC build, to create a debian- package first. Then we can work on a fix :) >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? gpc is not removed at all. Peter Novodvorski created a replacement, so we can drop gpc. He announced it, here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2002/debian-openoffice-200204/msg00069.html but it does not work yet. We have a libgpc0 in debian already, but is nonfree. We use the files from there and included it not into the source, as it is in the buildmanual of OOo mentioned. Using libgpc to build OpenOffice.org will move OpenOffice.org into contrib, not main... but OpenOffice is GPL and has to be come into main I think ...! >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? First, using Java for building OpenOffice.org will cause, that OpenOffice.org will come into debian/contrib, or in worst case, debian/nonfree. In this case, OpenOffice.org do not get the full support by debian, eg. autobuilders etc etc .... Java is highlly nonfree software, and we do not want to build OpenOffice.org with Java sometimes in the future! I expect OpenOffice.org in main, this means, that we find a replacement for gpc and try to use gcj as replacement for Java. I will recommend that. For further informations, please have a look at: http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines http://people.debian.org/~opal/java/policy.html And yes, we disabled java in the setup prozess. >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? We are going to build the fully OpenOffice.org Package. On I386, it will work without limit the product itself. I only disabled mozab for PPC, but I am not happy with it! Chris Halls and me are thinking, that we want to integrate the build of Mozilla into OpenOffice.org build, but this we can do, if he have a working package. I have to say, thnx for your great work and help, OpenOffice.org builds for me .. but packaging into debian-package makes some trouble :) >There is a difference between packaging up something and changing it >enough to cause confusion among users. I know .. I have to say again, we will not leave this already. My plan get the features back. But libmozab is the only thing, I dropped for building on PPC ... FYI ... >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. We have no "modules" for OpenOffice.org in the Debian-Bug-Track-System. I'm going to write a mail to several debian-mailinglists, not to file bugs against OpenOffice.org with your IssuesZilla and not filing bug in the Debian-BTS. They should write mail to debian-openoffice@lists.debian.org! ... We will write down a instruction for sending bugs in to the README for the package and package- description, too. So everybody can see, not filing bugs to your IssueZilla. I hope, this will help! >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. As I mailed you allready, I will join formally, espacially for getting OpenOffice.org work on PPC... but ... I'm not as good as you writing C++ code:) But I hope, I can help you! Debian- Woody will be released with 11 archetectures, so I'm going to work on some porting OpenOffice.org in other arches .. ;) I have an Indy and a sparc at home :) >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 ;-) Yes .. of course! :) >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!). Let me help you! Cheers Jan -- One time, you all will be emulated by linux! ---- Jan- Hendrik Palic Url:"http://www.billgotchy.de"; E-Mail: "palic@billgotchy.de" -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s: a-- C++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E W++ N+ o+ K- w--- O- M- V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5- X+++ R-- tv- b++ DI-- D+++ G+++ e+++ h+ r++ z+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
pgpwgO1tPSR4Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature