https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123810
[email protected] <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |120979 --- Comment #1 from [email protected] <[email protected]> --- (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #0) > The current Buildbot nightly rev1547747 installs Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 > Redistributable - x86 9.0.30729.6161 and msvc90.dll. Yes. It builds with MSVC2008 and the target depends on having a runtime matching to that compiler, i.e. the *90* version. > I performed an /A administrative install for the first time in a while, and > I first reverted the MSVC install that is run when the package is extracted. So you uninstalled msvc90.dll and its friends? > Then as package documentation readme.txt and readme.html indicate a > msvcr100.dll is needed, attempt to launch with a 32-bit MS Visual C++ 2010 > already present on system. However AOO rev1547747 will not launch. > Brief--unreadable dialog message and abort--can't find any log record of the > failed launch. > > Download and install current 32-bit MS Visual C++ 2010 for msvcr100.dll. > AOO 4.1.0 rev 1547747 still will not launch. > > Install AOO rev1547747 packaged MS Visual C++ 2008 with its msvcr90.dll (x86 > 9.0.30729.6161) and AOO launches and fully functional. Yes. You C-runtime libs matching to the compiler used for building the app+libs are needed. With MSVC2008==VC9.0 the 90 runtime is needed. > Is this a Buildbot packaging issue--or is there some disconnect between > stated C/C++ runtime requirements? We had an older issue about requiring > the msvcr100.dll for Java JRE stability, bug 120979 -- is the requirement > still valid Yes, that requirement is valid until the Java7 problem described in http://www.duckware.com/tech/java6msvcr71.html is solved. Maybe it already is in newer versions. > and shouldn't the AOO 4.1.0 dev snapshots be built against that > runtime and it be packaged? If AOO was building with MSVC2010 then this would be the case. But it currently doesn't, some adjustments to Makefiles and other solenv files would be needed. I'd say the best status for this issue is NOT_AN_ISSUE. But an enhancement issue like "allow building with MSVC201*" would be great. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.
