openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Who wants to build OpenOffice?
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2011 23:56:24 GMT
I had to wait until I got home to check the command history.

One thing I noticed.  I did:

sudo apt-get build-dep

That is what the Building Guide currently instructs for Ubuntu:

I'm seeing others in this thread say they did:

sudo apt-get build-dep libreoffice

That's my dependency problem right?


On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Mathias Bauer <> wrote:
> Am 06.09.2011 21:09, schrieb Eike Rathke:
>> Hi Rob,
>> On Tuesday, 2011-09-06 08:47:29 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> I did a build overnight on a freshly installed Ubuntu 11.04 (32-bit),
>>> Fresh, clean, nothing extra installed.  I had to even apt-get
>>> subversion to get started.
>> Well, yes, some basic tools aren't mentioned in the guide. Actually you
>> could had even build OOo by downloading the source bundle generated from
>> hg and wouldn't had needed mercurial installed.
>>> 2) We should add instructions for needed edits to etc/apt/sources.lst
>>> so the various required apt-get's work
>> Strange, what did you need to edit sources.lst for?
>>> 4) apt-get build-dep was insufficient.  I received
>>> configure errors after that and had to install many packages in
>>> addition
>> I encountered only two: libpam0g-dev and librsvg2-dev
>> But this after  apt-get build-dep libreoffice  on Debian wheezy where
>> is a transitional package.
>>> 6) The bootstrap was pulling down dependencies from Hg.  We need to
>>> get those into SVN or Apache-Extras, right?
>> Yes.
> Really? The "dependencies" (I assume these are the external tarballs)
> are not stored in a Mercurial repo. Nevertheless we have to find a place
> for them - or to get back to the old procedure that stored them inside
> the repo. At least those that have a suitable license.
> Regards,
> Mathias

View raw message