openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <>
Subject Re: Ready to setup release build machines?
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2016 17:04:30 GMT
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Andrea Pescetti <>

> On 21/08/2016 Kay Schenk wrote:
>> We REALLY REALLY NEED the CentOS5 32-bit and 64-bit VMS regardless of
>> what we do for Windows.
> I now have a repeatable process to create a CentOS 5 VM from scratch and
> building OpenOffice with it, meaning that I've successfully built 4.1.2 on
> it. I also have a ~200 MBytes snapshot (compressed disk image) that
> provides a minimal CentOS 5 where one can in principle install all needed
> dependencies through a script and build OpenOffice.


> I am still unsatisfied about some dependencies, namely the Perl
> dependencies and JUnit. I'd like to have a clean way for installing them,
> but unfortunately the default versions of other packages on CentOS 5 are
> too old. Fore reference,
> does not work for me while the discussion in
> 201206.mbox/%3CCALcb3vJd7t0CfgqCeCV7JmND43pECiwuovgjR8jVWdoF
> is promising but incomplete. The idea is:
> install both the needed Perl modules and JUnit in the least obtrusive way.

​Well we can work on this but the combination of CentOS5 and newer packs is
problematic I'm sure. I couldn't get some of the packs I needed for CenttOS
6.8 using standard repos.​

> For the current, successful, build I disabled JUnit and used workarounds
> to get around Perl modules needed by ./bootstrap by mirroring packages on a
> local server. Things might be better by switching to the new Java-based
> downloader by Damjan, but I am now building 4.1.2 and not trunk (so I might
> want to "backport" the new downloader).
> Conceptually, we COULD use the Win7 buildbot to
>> spin out the binaries for each language, but, then there's that download
>> them ALL and do the signing on some other box I was talking about earlier.
> I can assure you that uploading dozens GBytes to SVN is more painful...
> but you will have the occasion to try it out and compare. Fact is, whatever
> one wants to do, if Windows is missing then we have the n-th incomplete
> solution.

​OK. We can discuss this later...soon.


> What do you need from us to get this going? Were you planning on doing
>> the CentOS5 installations and then get back to us?
> A reference VM is the first step, and this is quite close. In an ideal
> world, we would then ask Infra to host a VM; but we already know this will
> be difficult due to the need for Infra to standardize on a few variants. So
> it might be that the outcome of my work is a nice wiki page that can be
> used to setup a release-capable build machine with minimal effort.
> It was time-limited and it expired. I'm not sure what Infra decided to
>>> do (they were examining options for code signing, with no big preference
>>> for the solution in use; this was about 6 months ago).
>> OK, we need to touch bases with them. And, find a committer that knows
>> how to do this.
> We've never signed our Windows installers this way (we do sign; just, not
> in a way that bypasses Windows warnings). It must be said that we've
> received virtually no requests for this by Windows users. Maybe I need to
> clarify the answer above: yes, I did get -now expired- access to a
> web-based signing system but we have never used it.

​More details in a separate thread would be helpful.

> Regards,
>   Andrea.

​Thanks for all this work. I suggest trying builds on /trunk and I would
bet the Perl problems go away. The new Java downloader is super!

​lease let us know how we can further contribute to this effort.​

Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice

"Things work out best for those who make
 the best of the way things work out."
                                           -- John Wooden

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message