[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Request for Help to build libreoffice3.6.3 backport from precise to lucid



[ uhm? This is a debian, not a Ubuntu list.. Anyway... And I Cc the
Ubuntu maintainer... ]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 04:07:50PM -0600, Eswaravaka, Sasi wrote:
>    1)      Got the source from
>    [1]http://www.libreoffice.org/download/?type=src&version=3.6.3

wrong. That's plain upstream sourcecode.

>    3)      I realized that there is no debian folder under the source code to
>    package to debian.

Of course not.

>    4)      I downloaded the source code for libreoffice 3.5.6 and where we
>    have the debian folder with control, rules files.

You probably you got Ubuntus source package.

So you also could just have gotten Debians 3.6.3 source package (-> experimental)
That is kept update with new releases. No idea why Ubuntu didn't yet update...
(rc2 is identical to the final.)

>    I suspected that this issue may be because of the dependencies not added
>    in the control file. So I thought of updating the dependencies properly in
>    the control file, for that I am thing to follow below steps.

3.5.x->3.6.x needs many changes in debian

>    3)      Now ran the apt-rdepends command to find out the dependencies of
>    libreoffice3.6.3

which only makes sense with the Debian debs. Upstream "debs" don't have the necessary info

>    4)      Use the same rules file from 3.5.6
> 
>    5)      Planning to update the control file and rerun the debuild command.

As said above, wrong.

>    As updating the control file is going to take some time,  before that I
>    wanted to confirm with you whether I am going in the right direction.

You are not.

>    Please direct me if there is any issue in the way I am trying to build the
>    packages.

Yes. It completely makes no sense.

>    1)      Is it safe to use the same rules file from libreoffice3.5.6 source
>    code?

No.

>    2)      Is the above followed direction correct to build packages?

No.

Regards,

Rene


Reply to: