[SCM] LibreOffice packaging repository branch, debian-experimental-3.6, updated. libreoffice_3.5.2-1-30-gfda7ed7
The following commit has been merged in the debian-experimental-3.6 branch:
commit fda7ed77066a2d0a4c00f1c5913b0e15aeee8a56
Author: Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org>
Date: Sat Apr 7 03:00:41 2012 +0200
make safe-jni-h-include.diff apply again
diff --git a/patches/safe-jni-h-include.diff b/patches/safe-jni-h-include.diff
index 3a43e76..c3b5169 100644
--- a/patches/safe-jni-h-include.diff
+++ b/patches/safe-jni-h-include.diff
@@ -9,24 +9,24 @@
CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -I$JAVA_HOME/include"
LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -L$JAVA_HOME/lib -lgcj"
exec 6>/dev/null # no output
-@@ -4336,6 +4338,7 @@
- AC_SUBST(JAVAIFLAGS)
- AC_SUBST(JAVACOMPILER)
- AC_SUBST(JAVADOC)
-+AC_SUBST(GCJ_JNI_INCLUDE)
+@@ -5469,7 +5469,6 @@
+ AC_SUBST(XCLASSPATH)
+ AC_SUBST(x_JAVALIB)
+ AC_SUBST(x_JDKLIB)
+-AC_SUBST(GCJ_JNI_INCLUDE)
dnl ===================================================================
dnl Checks for specific files.
---- a/set_soenv.in-old 2012-04-06 23:34:58.307738832 +0200
-+++ b/set_soenv.in 2012-04-06 23:37:24.960240235 +0200
-@@ -1311,6 +1311,10 @@
-
- $SOLARINC .=$I.$JAVA_HOME.$INCLUDE.$ds."native_threads".$INCLUDE;
- }
-+ if ($JDK eq "gcj")
-+ {
-+ $SOLARINC .= $I."@GCJ_JNI_INCLUDE@";
-+ }
- #The tail, if needed
- if ($platform =~ m/linux|freebsd|netbsd|aix|openbsd|dragonfly/)
- { if ( $XINC ne "/usr/include" && $XINC ne 'no_x_includes' ) {
+--- a/config_host.mk.in-old 2012-04-07 02:57:37.475759985 +0200
++++ b/config_host.mk.in 2012-04-07 02:58:17.976557350 +0200
+@@ -420,8 +420,8 @@
+ export SIZEOF_POINTER=@SIZEOF_POINTER@
+ export SIZEOF_SHORT=@SIZEOF_SHORT@
+ export SOLARENV=@SRC_ROOT@/solenv
+-export SOLARINC=@SOLARINC@
+-export SOLARINC_FOR_BUILD=@SOLARINC_FOR_BUILD@
++export SOLARINC=@SOLARINC@ @GCJ_JNI_INCLUDE@
++export SOLARINC_FOR_BUILD=@SOLARINC_FOR_BUILD@ @GCJ_JNI_INCLUDE@
+ export SOLARLIB=@SOLARLIB@
+ export SOLARLIB_FOR_BUILD=@SOLARLIB_FOR_BUILD@
+ export SOLARVER=@SRC_ROOT@/solver
--
LibreOffice packaging repository
Reply to: