Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
In-Reply-To: <006b01cc2354$0df84060$29e8c120$@acm.org>
References: <00b601cc2306$3e74a6f0$bb5df4d0$@acm.org>
 <BANLkTimYn08UBa5SLO58F6yumdf+RqZrhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <006b01cc2354$0df84060$29e8c120$@acm.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-33-389152611
Message-Id: <3BD1EE8B-BE2B-43DA-BFA1-CAA29C2FDC2C@free.fr>
From: eric b <eric.bachard@free.fr>
Subject: OpenOffice.org dependencies at runtime. was:  Re: OO/LO License + Why
 LO needs the AFL 2.0 to exist (quickly)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:09:10 +0200
To: general@incubator.apache.org

--Apple-Mail-33-389152611
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=UTF-8;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed

Hi,


First over all, I'm not a native speaker, but I think I can answer.

Apologies if I'm off topic, this thread is extremely difficult to =20
follow.


Le 5 juin 11 =C3=A0 09:41, Dennis E. Hamilton a =C3=A9crit :

> I was thinking about binary-only components such as a linker =20
> library or shared library that was under a non-Apache license but =20
> that needed to be included in deployments of OpenOffice.org.


As builder / dev since years in OOo, we separated

- build dependencies : the builder MUST install something to make the =20=

build possible.
- install dependencies : the user must install something to be sure =20
OpenOffice.org will launch and work correctly

I suppose we are talking about the second one.

If in this case, and if this can be helpfull for you, the policy for =20
external code was handled by external project -> http://=20
external.openoffice.org/
Martin Hollmichel (Sun / Oracle employee the last time I've heard of) =20=

is IMHO the one to be contated for further information.

Back to install time now. More basicaly, we currently have :

1) Windows


Windows build, is provided as a set, auto-installable : no need to =20
link to anything else, the set is linked to system dll only.

Nothing must be installed so far, excepted Java, but Java missing is =20
not an issue.

Please somebody correct me if Im wrong.


2) Mac OS X

Since we removed as much as possible to any dependencies (I was one =20
of the actor of this cleanup), the set is currently provided as disk =20
image, containing everything.

Java is the one shipped on the system, and if ever Java is not =20
installed, OpenOffice.org will work anyway (some features missing only).


3) Linux

It is very easy to provide a standalone product, without the need to =20
use other system binaries, and I confirm this is possible. The facts =20
are different : to avoid as much as possible to have the same libs/=20
binaries in the installed set (avoiding twice installation of the =20
same dependencies), it is common to link wiht system libraries and =20
binaries at buildtime, considering the user will have to install the =20
dependency himself.  This is the same for a lot of applications on =20
Debian, e.g. and make the full installation lighter.

Please not this is true for a majority of Linux's but there could be =20
one excpetion I'm not aware.

4) FreeBSD and OpenBSD do the same (I wrote a ports makefile for =20
OpenBSD, and things are similar)

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

5) Solaris

I don't know


> That would require a different version of the binary-only component =20=

> for every platform environment the Apache code is expected to build =20=

> for and deploy to.
>


I don't think this is mandatory at all, but I can be wrong.


> Since OpenOffice.org code is mostly C++ and the trend is to remove =20
> the Java dependencies (at least over on LibreOffice), this seems =20
> more awkward than whatever the benefit might be.
>


I already removed all Java dependencies in OOo4Kids and OOoLight in =20
OpenOffice.org for all ports, and that's not a problem.


> I need to step back and look at this more carefully.  My starting-=20
> out assumptions are that OpenOffice.org builds don't depend on =20
> binary-only components in deployed distributions.


I think so too, but I agree a clear choice must be made very soon.


>   In addition, I'm trusting that any dependencies on third-party =20
> source code or binary libraries are either non-toxic, can be worked-=20=

> around/done-without for as long as we'd need to have an alternative =20=

> in place.  Whistling in the dark here ...
>


Hope my mail will help you.


Regards,
Eric Bachard

--=20
q=C9=94=E1=B4=89=C9=B9=C9=99
Education Project:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news


--Apple-Mail-33-389152611--