incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
Date Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:59:24 GMT

On Jan 2, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote:

> Hi Dave
> Just to clarify. Mechtilde is a contributor since day 0 - 7 years. She is one of the
moast experienced QA here, and a verry skilled manual tester. So she is not a newbe at all.

I didn't mean to imply that she is a newbie. She is likely very busy and may have missed some
of the threads. I'm only trying to point out what I've seen. My details are not complete as
I only glance at the build emails.

> I build only for mac, for linux i point to the Buildbot too. If this builds don't work
for a Linux distribution it is a serios problem, so it's right to bring it on the list.
> What Mechtilde miss, are de frequently snapshots from the project it self, not from same
contributors. The test build should be from the same mashine as the final release. You can
build AOO on two computers with Linux, you will have two different builds even you use the
same revision.
> For this reason, test builds has to come from the same mashin as the release. For my
point of view it's not a good idea to use a contributors computer for it. So the main plattform
Wendows, Linux, Mac realy need a Buildbot, and this is not a "nice to have" it's a *realy
urgent task*

Please see

Andrew has been working on the ubuntu build since mid-November.

So the project misses builds and the project has been working on the issue.

> And if one of this Buildbot produce unusable builds, then we have a serios problem.

Sure and that is to be fixed by engaging in the buildbot development process. Andrew Rist
and Gavin are the people to engage.


> Greetings Raphael
> Am 02.01.12 17:47, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> Hi Mechtilde,
>> There are developer snapshots available - if you follow the ML closely they are discussed.
>> Have a look at this:
>> Raphael has been making significant contributions to AOO since day one.
>> Andrew RIst and others have been working with Gavin from Apache Infra on buildbots
for several platforms.
>> Please see
>> I agree that this information is hard to find. Someone should blog about it and let
people know...
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Mechtilde wrote:
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> Hello Jürgen,
>>> Am 02.01.2012 10:32, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>>> Hi Mechtilde,
>>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Mechtilde<>  wrote:
>>>> Hey,
>>>> you discuss about Release Plan and who are allowed to distribute
>>>> binaries with the name Apache OpenOffice.
>>>> But:
>>>> What should a user do?
>>>> There is no "official" binary available which anyone can install for
>>>> testing.
>>>> The DEB binary from
>>>> can't be installed on a Debian 64 bit system.
>>>> I already described this problem at 17.12.2011 but nothing happened. As
>>>> Ariel described there must be an update of one programm on the buildbot.
>>>> Does Apache also want to release more than one plattform?
>>>> So we also need test binaries for these plattforms.
>>>> In my opinion this is an *absolute release stopper* not to have binaries
>>>> to test from "official" build maschines.
>>>>> it's of course a serious problem where we have to find a solution. We
>>>>> have the same infra structure as before and the release engineers did
a lot
>>>>> to ensure a common base line to support as many Linux versions as possible.
>>> At this time there is NO other version for any plattform on
>>> available
>>>>> Normally the office would come via the distro and would have been build
>>>>> the distro and the specific versions of the system libraries. This is
>>>>> easier and i hope we can achieve this state in the future...
>>> There is NO version of Apache OpenOffice and there is NO version to test
>>> it before a release.
>>>>> For now we have to find another solution. We should update the build
>>>>> machine if possible. You have already mentioned the note from Ariel.
And it
>>>>> would be probably good to have a 32 bit build bot machine as well.  That
>>>>> would help a lot and would probably  address most the systems (an update
>>>>> on  Linux system is done quite often, isn't it)
>>> It depends on the based distribution.
>>> Debian oldstable ( ca. 3 years old IMO) contains e very newer version of
>>> the epm programm than the one Ariel talked from.
>>>>> We should define the exact switches that we use for our binary releases
>>>>> hopefully we can provide a set of builds on various systems for testing
>>>>> purposes.
>>> That's what I ask for.
>>>>> There is definitely a lot of room for improvements, so let us start to
>>>>> figure our out what works best and let us improve our build/release process
>>>>> over time.
>>> So when can we start to test the first binary coming from Apache?
>>> Thats my question
>>> Kind Regards
>>> Mechtilde
>>>>> Juergen
>>>> Kind Regards
>>>> Mechtilde
>>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
>>> iEYEARECAAYFAk8B3D0ACgkQucZfh1OziSsnIQCgng7nknPbh6l9CDepzoTrw9AG
>>> K2YAn39Ck/9nbWa7CgWoD8EXJZuB0wZe
>>> =ulAm
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> -- 
> My private Homepage:

View raw message