incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mechtilde <...@mechtilde.de>
Subject Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
Date Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:33:02 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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 <ooo@mechtilde.de> 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  http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/
> 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 don't
>> 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
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/ available



>> Normally the office would come via the distro and would have been build for
>> the distro and the specific versions of the system libraries. This is much
>> 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 bot
>> 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 and
>> 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
> 
>>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk8B3D0ACgkQucZfh1OziSsnIQCgng7nknPbh6l9CDepzoTrw9AG
K2YAn39Ck/9nbWa7CgWoD8EXJZuB0wZe
=ulAm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mime
View raw message