Thanks Michael for the head up about build-nocheck. I used it as a last resort, because I am still unable to have 'make' finished without an error if I don't add that parameter.
The use of that parameter is even sort of advised on the LibreOffice blog ( https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2019/06/12/start-developing-libreoffice-download-the-source-code-and-build-on-linux/ ) "If you would like to compile without unit tests (for example, if you don’t want to check that what you have changed in the source code will cause regressions), use the *build-nocheck* parameter instead" El jue., 8 ago. 2019 a las 10:54, Eike Rathke (<er...@redhat.com>) escribió: > Hi dreamnext, > > On Thursday, 2019-08-08 10:36:17 -0500, dreamn...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Thanks for you help. the 'make build-nocheck' did the trick of passing > the > > unit test, and it finishes successfully :-) > > > > Now I'm on the stage of trying to build distributable deb files. > > Which isn't recommendable though.. or rather ill-advised. Building > without checks and distributing means it may (and probably will) fail > for the end user when installed. Checks are there for a reason. make > build-nocheck does not pass the tests, it skips them. Actually > build-nocheck should never be recommended unless someone wants to do > private builds to investigate failures or do modifications and at the > end would run a build with checks again. > > Eike > > -- > GPG key 0x6A6CD5B765632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 > 2D3A >
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
