openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <>
Subject Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
Date Fri, 05 Oct 2012 20:01:10 GMT
The buildsys branch looks broken here:

Configure completed

Run ./bootstrap in /usr/ports/editors/openoffice-3-devel/work/ooo/main to provide build tools
and get third-party packages
===>  Building for apache-openoffice-3.4.1391327,1
chmod: /solenv/bin/ No such file or directory
chmod: /solenv/bin/ No such file or directory
chmod: /solenv/bin/ No such file or directory
chmod: /solenv/bin/ No such file or directory
./bootstrap: not found
*** Error code 127

Stop in /usr/ports/editors/openoffice-3-devel.
*** Error code 1

Looks like a path issue.



> From: Andrew Rist <>
>To: "" <> 
>Cc: "" <> 
>Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 11:16 PM
>Subject: Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
>I'll checkin the code this week - was trying to get a working env with he branch, and
was having the usual issues.
>Don't know how far we're taking this , but would be nice to leave the build cleaner and
more stable...
>Sent from my iThingie
>On Sep 30, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Pedro Giffuni <> wrote:
>> Hi Ariel;
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile <>
>>> Hi Pedro,
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 09:07:03AM -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>> There is currently nothing here, in fact trunk is more up to date.
>>>> Can I start committing stuff or should Andrew do it?
>>> IMHO only Andrew, as Oracle representative, can commit the patches. The
>>> idea is to ensure that patches are granted by Oracle without the need to
>>> ask for another software grant for this particular cws. I guess this
>>> should be the procedure people should follow if interested in getting
>>> cws code granted by Oracle; the other way is to ask for a software grant
>>> on every file in the cws, but I guess that this won't scale (Oracle will
>>> have to redo the same amount of work they did for the original software
>>> grant).
>> OK, I can wait.
>>> Concerning this particular case, once Andrew commits the patches, there
>>> should be some agreement on what to do: IMHO, the first thing should be
>>> to ensure that the code builds in Windows, Linux and MacOSX (that cws
>>> didn't originally take into account OS2 nor FreeBSD), otherwise there is
>>> the chance that changes made for OS2/FreeBSD/Solaris/etc end up breaking
>>> something that was actually working in the cws; and it may be then hard
>>> to guess where and why it got broken (just like the boost/stlport case).
>> I expect the only files that I have to touch are FreeBSD specific so that
>> probably won't be the case here. In any case I would expect the branch
>> won't be merged into trunk until any issue with the FreeBSD and/or
>>  Linux/Mac Windows ports are fixed.
>> cheers,
>> Pedro.
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message