incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: Who wants to build OpenOffice? - win32, win64
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:06:25 GMT
Thanks, Tor and Michael, for the additional information.

I have 36GB free on my Tablet PC hard drive.  If the network is too slow I can make a local-drive
SVN Working folder and do the build on the Tablet using VC++ 2008.  Reading off of the Windows
Home Serve doesn't seem too bad, but I would do some small-build comparisons before trying
a full build with source on a shared drive. 

If it is necessary to use 2008 often, I will consider a VM on the main machine just to have
more power. (The Tablet PC has slower HD, 1.5GM RAM, and 1.7GHz Pentium M.)  I do want to
avoid installing 2008 and 2010 side-by-side though. 

I don't mind struggling with the different cl.exe versions to get to the bottom of the differences
and see how to build on 2010 as well, especially in order to be able to build and test win64

I'm in no hurry for that part.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Stahl [] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 01:26
Subject: Re: Who wants to build OpenOffice?

On 31.08.2011 02:32, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I'll bite.  I've got a Dell XPS 9100 running Windows 7 x64 with 1.6TB
> free on the HD (only 7200RPM though, keeps my Windows Experience
> Index at 5.9 - everything else in 7.7-7.8), 18GB DDR3 RAM, and Intel
> i7X980 processor.  I've got a few more TB on a LAN-based server; I
> suspect compiling from an SVN Working Copy there is probably not a
> smart idea, though I could try that someday.

in Hamburg we have a lot of experience with building OOo over network

this works very well for any real UNIX system over NFS (takes maybe 2-3x
longer than a build on local storage), but with Windows it's a complete
non-starter; IIRC over the native Samba protocol (or whatever it's
called) it takes something like 50x longer (yes, 50 times), and via
various Windows NFS clients it was faster but never worked reliably.

for this reason we had infrastructure to do automated builds on Windows
by copying the whole source tree over the net via rsync (which is fast
even on Windows), then building on the local storage, then rsync the
build output back.

> I already have an SVN Working copy on the local HD.  I am certain
> there are tools I don't have.  I am also running Visual C++ 2010 (not
> 2008) Express Edition on this box, so that will provide an
> interesting challenge.  Microsoft SDK v7.1 is installed but I don't
> seem to have the 64-bit compiler.

i don't believe we have a working windows 64-bit build yet, so you
should use 32-bit compiler anyway.

> Many dots remain to be connected, I'm certain.
> - Dennis
> Just for laughs, I also have the Subsystem for Unix Applications
> (SUA) set up, but building a Posix native for Windows (and XServer)
> is probably an even greater stretch.  I intend that for confirming
> that command-line tools and libraries I build for Windows are also
> portable to *nix to a first approximation.

for the Windows build we currently require Cygwin; perhaps it would be
possible to build with this Microsoft UNIX thing instead, but i don't
think anybody has tried it.

> Oh, and I have virtual PC and have OpenBSD in one of the VMs.  I
> could also make another Windows XP VM if necessary, perhaps with
> Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition.

be aware that building in a VM takes quite a bit longer.


"This isn't about what is," said Mr Nancy.  "It's about what people
 _think_ is.  It's all imaginary anyway.  That's why it's important.
 People only fight about imaginary things." -- Neil Gaiman, American Gods

View raw message