Le Lundi 26 Juin 2006 14:13, Ramón García a écrit : > And one missing feature that I regard as almost essential is make > install. I would like to test code that I have just developed without > waiting for slow compression of files into RPMS and then install them. > It should not be difficult to do, for people who understand the RPM > building and know where the list of files comprising each package are.
I fully agree. Although I see that problem as more general. OOo should really stick to GNU conventions: - be able to use bash, not tcsh (it's a long time I did not try, please ignore this remark if it goes better now.) - rely on automake and autoconf - no strange bootstrapping (./bootstrap, source LinuxSetEnv.Set, etc) - simple ./configure, make, make install. Like you, I especially miss "make install". - OOo should not attempt to build its own packages, at least under Linux. Under Linux, that's the distributions' work! This problem is related to the "make install" one. But as you say, that's not easily fixed. And a few things like "build" and "deliver" can make your life easier once you have understood them... which is not necessarily obvious. The other terrible problem is the bureaucracy^H submission process (EIS, CWSes, QA, integration...). Although I understand it can also have a number of advantages. I suppose that has already been discussed many times... -- Si on ne peut pas toujours compter sur ses amis, on peut toujours compter son or. (Donjon de Naheulbeuk) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
