Re: Strange error while building OO for windows

I tried to build OpenOffice from svn's AOO413 tag today, this time successful. Still i have to say that the wiki page with step-by-step guide has some errors that i had to deal with(or it's outdated a bit). Things that I encountered so far: 1. Suggested ./configure option list in the wiki is

Re: 4.1.4 blockers (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Am 02.05.2017 um 23:51 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Am 02.05.2017 um 13:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Mar 22, 2017, at 8:43 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: If we decide to get the new ASF logos for the installer, we should also update the setup icons for Windows/macOS and

Re: 4.1.4 blockers (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Am 02.05.2017 um 13:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> On Mar 22, 2017, at 8:43 AM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> >> Hi Raphael, >> >> Thank you for your effort! >> Hopefully Ariel will still be able to assist, but it is really time for a >> 4.1.4 RC. >> >> May I suggest

Re: 4.1.4 blockers (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 2, 2017, at 7:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127341 (Update bundled dictionaries for AOO 4.1.4 release) +1 as well... r1784925 r1784961 r1785175 r1793216 Backported to 4.1.4... It seems the Bugzilla bot

4.1.4_release_blocker granted: [Issue 127341] Update bundled dictionaries for AOO 4.1.4 release

Andrea Pescetti has granted Matthias Seidel 's request for 4.1.4_release_blocker: Issue 127341: Update bundled dictionaries for AOO 4.1.4 release https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127341 --- Comment #6 from Andrea Pescetti

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Jim Jagielski wrote: FWIW, I've kicked off a CentOS5.11 x64 build on my VM. My CentOS 64 builds are online and confirmed to be working by others who use it for daily tasks (see archives of this list, or just ask if you need a link). Unless you see a reason for making alternate ones, I think

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Am 02.05.2017 um 22:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > Since I'm not doing a Windows build, I assume we don't need to install > it and have it part of the SVN tag?? I am not so familiar with the procedure, but that sounds reasonable. So whoever does the Windows builds has to make sure to include

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Since I'm not doing a Windows build, I assume we don't need to install it and have it part of the SVN tag?? > On May 2, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 02.05.2017 um 21:17 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> On May 2, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Matthias Seidel

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Am 02.05.2017 um 21:17 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> On May 2, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127176#c24 >> >> We only have to make sure, that we bundle the most recent msvcr100.dll >> (32bit) for

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

> On May 2, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127176#c24 > > We only have to make sure, that we bundle the most recent msvcr100.dll > (32bit) for the windows build. > (see:

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Hi Jim, https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127176#c24 We only have to make sure, that we bundle the most recent msvcr100.dll (32bit) for the windows build. (see: .../main/external/msvcp100/README_msvcX100.dll.txt) Regards, Matthias P.S.: I will come back later with a full list of

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

Went OK... Will now kick off a x32 build... These are test builds, since we still have 2 backports pending:: > On Mar 22, 2017, at 8:43 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Raphael, > > Thank you for your effort! > Hopefully Ariel will still be able to assist, but

Re: Apache OpenOffice NG

On 5/2/2017 8:42 AM, Jorg Schmidt wrote: From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] The issue that I see is that our end-user community is not the same as, for example, subversion... I would hazard that the vast majority of AOO users have no idea what "open source" means and the

Re: Apache OpenOffice NG

> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] > The issue that I see is that our end-user community is not the same > as, for example, subversion... I would hazard that the vast majority > of AOO users have no idea what "open source" means and the distinction > between being a source-only

Re: 4.1.4 blockers (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

> On May 2, 2017, at 7:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127341 >> (Update bundled dictionaries for AOO 4.1.4 release) >> > > +1 as well... > > r1784925 r1784961 r1785175 r1793216 > Backported to 4.1.4...

Re: Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

FWIW, I've kicked off a CentOS5.11 x64 build on my VM. I've updated the wiki build page (https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step) with some updates, most due to CentOS5 is now EOL and some urls have changed. Plus, I needed to manually install File::Path

Centos5 builds (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

I have 2 CentOS5 VMs setup, one 32bit the other 64. Is anyone else on task for doing 4.1.4 build for these platforms or should I give it a go? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional

4.1.4 blockers (Was: Re: Release 4.1.3 (4.1.4))

> On Mar 22, 2017, at 8:43 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Raphael, > > Thank you for your effort! > Hopefully Ariel will still be able to assist, but it is really time for a > 4.1.4 RC. > > May I suggest that these "release blocker" should also be merged: >

Re: Apache OpenOffice NG

Exactly. It seems just a distraction to me, unless I've missed hidden or untold bonus points. R 2017-05-02 13:11 GMT+02:00 Jim Jagielski : > The issue that I see is that our end-user community is not the same > as, for example, subversion... I would hazard that the vast

Re: Apache OpenOffice NG

The issue that I see is that our end-user community is not the same as, for example, subversion... I would hazard that the vast majority of AOO users have no idea what "open source" means and the distinction between being a source-only project and "source-only-but-we-also-provide-