Well, my first compile attempts had not been very good. I followed the instructions kindly provided by Michael Weghorn, and downloaded and uncompress the source packages libreoffice-6.3.0.3.tar.xz, libreoffice-dictionaries-6.3.0.3.tar.xz, libreoffice-help-6.3.0.3.tar.xz and libreoffice-translations-6.3.0.3.tar.xz
The first issue was that autogen requires the presence of gstreamer1.0 AND of gstreamer0.10. gstreamer0.10 is deprecated, but anyway I found and installed the required gstreamer0.10 deb packages from elsewhere, but it still complained that they were missing, so I added a --disable-gstreamer-0-10 parameter. Then a new error appeared: "configure: error: Wrong qmake for Qt5 found. Please specify the root of your Qt5 installation by exporting QT5DIR before running "configure". Error running configure at ./autogen.sh line 302." However, the qt5-qmake and qt5-qmake-bin packages are installed in my system! Since I was not able to stat compiling using Michael instructions, I wondered what would happen if I followed instead the steps recently published on the LibreOffice blog ( https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2019/06/12/start-developing-libreoffice-download-the-source-code-and-build-on-linux/ ) It was a blind choice, since I have no idea what LibreOffice version would I get if compiled (is there a way to get an specific version?), or how easy would be to generate deb packages afterwards. In that set of instructions I changed: --with-lang=hu en-US to --with-lang=es en-US in order to try to obtain a LibreOffice in Spanish language, not in Hungarian. I also removed the following lines: --with-referenced-git=/home/linuxosfelhasznalonev/libreoffice/core --with-external-tar=/home/linuxosfelhasznalonev/libreoffice/core/external/tarballs As they point to hard paths on the disk of the article author. I tried to reproduce those paths to match my own by creating core, external and tarballs directories, but it didn't work, so I merely removed those two lines. This time it began compiling, but after A LOT of hours and more of 40 GB used, the make command always stops at this error: "Error: a unit test failed, please do one of: make CppunitTest_sc_filters_test CPPUNITTRACE="gdb --args" # for interactive debugging on Linux make CppunitTest_sc_filters_test VALGRIND=memcheck # for memory checking make CppunitTest_sc_filters_test DEBUGCPPUNIT=TRUE # for exception catching You can limit the execution to just one particular test by: make CPPUNIT_TEST_NAME="testXYZ" ...above mentioned params... /home/linux/libreoffice/libreoffice/solenv/gbuild/CppunitTest.mk:113: recipe for target '/home/linux/libreoffice/libreoffice/workdir/CppunitTest/sc_filters_test.test' failed make[1]: *** [/home/linux/libreoffice/libreoffice/workdir/CppunitTest/sc_filters_test.test] Error 1 Makefile:167: recipe for target 'CppunitTest_sc_filters_test' failed make: *** [CppunitTest_sc_filters_test] Error 2" So, I'm kind of stuck in both procedures. Does somebody knows how to solve on one or both? Thanks in advance El vie., 26 jul. 2019 a las 10:01, dreamn...@gmail.com (<dreamn...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Hi! Greetings from the Escuelas Linux team. We are small Linux > distribution that can be downloaded from > https://sourceforge.net/projects/escuelaslinux/. > Some more references about our activity can be found by doing an Internet > search, or on own Facebook account, escuelas.linux > > We still provide a 32-bit edition of our distro, because among our users > there are a lot of low-income public schools, in which are still in use old > computers with about 512 MB to a 1 GB of RAM. That amount of RAM would make > running a Linux 64-bit system awfully slow, so we have to accommodate to > the needs and possibilities of what is available in poor areas, those in > which even having an old computer is still somehow a luxury. > > We perfectly understand that TDF releasing 32-bit Linux LibreOffice > packages was not worth anymore, given the small amount of downloads. > Certainly some of those downloads were made by us, as we only required one > download of a given LibreOffice version to have it installed in our distro > and be used in hundreds of computers. A lot of those computers could not > even be traceable, since there are no Internet connection in poor or remote > schools. But we believe that even if we reported who and where are those > schools, that would be still a small amount to be worth the effort and > resources required to match the bigger amounts of downloads that seems to > be receiving the LibreOffice 32-bit Windows counterpart. > > Given that TDF ended the provision of Linux 32-bit distribution neutral > binaries, but not the 32-bit compatibility, we would like to step up to > produce by ourselves the 32-bit distribution neutral deb packages from > LibreOffice 6.3 and up. We are not aware of other distros or volunteers > releasing the most recent LibreOffice version to date (6.3) as 32-bit > distribution independent binaries. > > Recently, the official LibreOffice Blog published instructions about how > to compile LibreOffice on Linux. However, we’d like to be able not only to > compile LibreOffice, but we would like to learn how to be able to produce > by ourselves the same set of 32-bit distribution-independent deb packages > that were compressed as a .tar.gz, that is, the LibreOffice binaries > (LibreOffice_?.?.?_Linux_x86-_deb.tar.gz), the translated user interface > (the LibreOffice_?.?.?_Linux_x86-_deb_langpack_??.tar.gz) and the offline > help (LibreOffice_?.?.?_Linux_x86-_deb_helppack_??.tar.gz). As for the user > interface and the offline packages, our main focus would be Spanish > language. > > On the download section is always available the following source code > packages: > libreoffice-?.?.?.?.tar.xz > libreoffice-dictionaries-?.?.?.?.tar.xz > libreoffice-help-?.?.?.?.tar.xz > libreoffice-translations-?.?.?.?.tar.xz > > But, given our inexperience, we don’t know how to use this source packages > to produce the same set of 32-bit deb packages as were previously provided > by TDF. Since LibreOffice is distributed in a lot of languages, we guess > that the user interface and offline packages are not created manually one > by one by hand, some useful scripts could have been created to automate as > far as possible those tasks. > > So, we respectfully ask for some pointers and steps required to reach this > goal. In this way, we might be able to continue the production of the > 32-bit deb packages, freeing TDF of that burden as planned but, at the same > time, we could provide those packages for the parties that could be still > interested in them. We could not be able to support rpm-based binaries > though, someone else would have to step up if there's a need for that. > > Please let us know if this request of help is feasible for the > Developer(s) that are responsible of the LibreOffice packaging. > >
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
