Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
  b=uj6jc+di8rCM9i0SAP5rztatsr4n8XxUOnT43kGRXqTbLZcHZvoExGDKpqR5liqCPIBgWSy9fF2bB+BTlUe+uBkSPX4zqlKDlhQfRdkkR5tdE2PoQTrgzpMYxb9doZxu6XLbbakBOT+6PHzqmUmWIyt3dVnYLL8bxbKxGmJ6Sbo=;
Message-ID: <1311169374.96545.YahooMailClassic@web110211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Richard E. Breed IV" <whitehousetv@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ICU
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <1311168694.74897.YahooMailRC@web39321.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-600792852-1311169374=:96545"

--0-600792852-1311169374=:96545
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hey folks...a friend used my laptop, and I am getting tons of emails I =0Ad=
o not understand from a really smart & interesting group of =0Afolks...but,=
 I need to unsubscribe and there's no such button at the =0Abottom, can you=
 help?

THanks..chard

Richard Edwards Breed IV
Richard Edwards Breed IV

--- On Wed, 7/20/11, BRM <bm_witness@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: BRM <bm_witness@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ICU
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, July 20, 2011, 9:31 AM

----- Original Message ----

> From: Michael Stahl <mst@openoffice.org>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Wed, July 20, 2011 8:18:10 AM
> Subject: Re: ICU
>=20
> On 20.07.2011 13:41, Eike Rathke wrote:
> > The most problematic is the=A0 RPATH for URE patch, but I have no idea
> > anyway how to proceed with=A0 libstdc++.so.6 and libgcc_s.so.1 that so =
far
> > were distributed with the=A0 URE and are LGPL. If we don't, then the pa=
tch
> > would be moot.
>=20
> that=A0 is an interesting point: we currently ship binaries of C++ runtim=
e=20
>libraries in=A0 the installation sets.
> i know that we do this for Linux and Windows, don't=A0 know about other=
=20
>platforms; presumably relicensing GCC or MSVC runtime under=A0 Apache lice=
nse is=20
>not an option.
>=20
> i guess we can probably drop the GCC=A0 libraries nowadays, because libst=
dc++=20
>doesn't change its ABI as much as it used=A0 to, so everybody should have =
a good=20
>enough one on their system.
>=20
> i wonder=A0 what would happen if we drop MSVC runtime?
>=20

Per MSVC run-time, it is typically good practice to have the installer pack=
age=20
the MSVC Run-time redistributable and install it if necessary.
The redistributable is provided in two manners: (i) a full installer, and (=
ii)=20
MSI Merge Modules that you select while building an MSI installer that prov=
ides=20
them - e.g. Visual Studios Installer, InstallShield, etc.
The difference being that the full installer will install to the system, wh=
ile=20
(I believe) the MSI Merge Modules put the DLLs into the application install=
ation=20
only.
These are primarily provided to ensure the application runs one systems whe=
re=20
the user/Microsoft has not already installed the redistributables system-wi=
de=20
(e.g. VS2010 redist on WinXP SP3).

Using the full installer would present the user with Microsoft's license=A0=
 for=20
acceptance; where the Merge Modules do not. For that reason the=A0 full ins=
taller=20
would likely be preferable from a license pov.

While it is not licensed under ASL, as that is the generally recommended=20
practice for Windows Installers would that still be possible via Apache=20
guidelines?

$0.02

Ben

--0-600792852-1311169374=:96545--