[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 User sb changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 11 16:59:03 + 2010 --- . - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 User sb changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED Target milestone|--- |OOo 3.3 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Tue Mar 9 12:44:36 + 2010 --- OK to set to FIXED, I assume (I want to pass CWS sb118 to QA soon) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 08:25:20 + 2010 --- any objection to push it like it is [...] and do finetuning/improvements later? Fine with me. Two further points: 1 CPPUNIT_CFLAGS should probably always only be added to CXXFLAGS, never to CFLAGS. 2 From what I had written down at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Test_Cleanup#CppUnit_1.12.1 a while ago, TODO: OOo configure --with-system-cppunit (only if also --with-system-stl!); minimal required version? That is, configure should fail for --with-system-cppunit/--without-system-stl combination. I am not (yet) sure what the minimal required version is, though. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 08:37:40 + 2010 --- 1 CPPUNIT_CFLAGS should probably always only be added to CXXFLAGS, never to CFLAGS. maybe, but CFLAGS works and is consistent with the rest. 2 From what I had written down at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Test_Cleanup#CppUnit_1.12.1 a while ago, TODO: OOo configure --with-system-cppunit (only if also --with-system-stl!); minimal required version? ARGH. Not again. That is, configure should fail for --with-system-cppunit/--without-system-stl combination. I am not (yet) sure what the minimal required version is, though. Well, I guess we can just use 1.12, no? Shouldn't matter much as we didn't have that flag before anywy. Wrt STLport: no way, if you really have a STL conflict (like we ha(d/ve) with graphite and mysqlc) apply a workaround like the one caolan did for graphite already (see issue 106157); it is bad to use system-cppunit on everything except i386. Better all or none - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 User rene changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|'sb' |'cmc,sb' --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 08:42:25 + 2010 --- Ccing cmc - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from c...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 08:53:21 + 2010 --- mumble, we should really consider dropping using stlport in OOo itself, and just build it and bundle it as an extra into the install sets for compatibility with existing 3rd party binary extensions. I think that'd probably work as I don't think it would modify the public abi to build it against just libstdc++. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 09:16:39 + 2010 --- 1 CPPUNIT_CFLAGS should probably always only be added to CXXFLAGS, never to CFLAGS. maybe, but CFLAGS works and is consistent with the rest. Technically, CFLAGS works (as CFLAGS is added to C++ compilation in addition to CXXFLAGS), but CXXFLAGS would be more correct. Anyway, even if you want to keep using CFLAGS for consistency, please clean up the places that now have both, CFLAGS+=CPPUNIT_CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS+=CPPUNIT_CFLAGS. That is, configure should fail for --with-system-cppunit/--without-system-stl combination. I am not (yet) sure what the minimal required version is, though. Well, I guess we can just use 1.12, no? Shouldn't matter much as we didn't have that flag before anywy. Probably good, yes. If somebody ever has a need for a lower version, they can check to modify this then. Wrt STLport: no way, if you really have a STL conflict (like we ha(d/ve) with graphite and mysqlc) apply a workaround like the one caolan did for graphite already (see issue 106157); it is bad to use system-cppunit on everything except i386. Better all or none You unfortunately cannot work around that here. The interface of CppUnit is full of std-types, so the OOo test code calling CppUnit and CppUnit itself have to use the same STL implementation. However, the OOo test code also shall access OOo code that has std-types in its respective interface, so those two need to use the same STL implementation, too. We can only improve things here when we eventually drop the STLport-requirement (and become URE-incompatible on the affected platforms). - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 09:33:23 + 2010 --- @cmc: Might work (problematic could be the ABIs of cppuhelper and salhelper, incl. passing objects through void* and throwing std-based exceptions). Anyway, I would prefer moving that to another issue or thread. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 09:41:00 + 2010 --- We can only improve things here when we eventually drop the STLport-requirement (and become URE-incompatible on the affected platforms). one more reason we should have done it with 3.0.0 (major version which has other structure because of the 3-layers anyway, why not breking this then) :-( - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Thu Mar 4 09:46:59 + 2010 --- sb: ok, added the check :-( - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 User rene changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |68134) patch --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:08:29 + 2010 --- Created an attachment (id=68134) patch - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 Issue #|109791 Summary|[cws sb118] system-cppunit Component|tools Version|current Platform|All URL| OS/Version|All Status|NEW Status whiteboard| Keywords| Resolution| Issue type|PATCH Priority|P3 Subcomponent|code Assigned to|rene Reported by|rene --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:07:27 + 2010 --- as $SUBJECT says. No idea why not done when switching cppunit to a normal cppunit, but anyway... - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:30:33 + 2010 --- @rene: A few things come to mind: 1 libs.mk CPPUNITLIB: For one, shouldn't the check for SYSTEM_CPPUNIT come before the check for WNT (so that WNT could, at least in principle, also use SYSTEM_CPPUNIT)? For another, the += in CPPUNITLIB += $(CPPUNIT_LIBS) is probably a typo. (And for a third, wouldn't it be better to replace CPPUNITLIB with CPPUNIT_LIBS everywhere and set it in libs.mk only if not SYSTEM_CPPUNIT?) 2 What looks odd is that only sal/cppunittester/makefile.mk mentions CPPUNIT_CFLAGS, not the other makefiles that reference cppunit. (And again, wouldn't it be better if the CFLAGS+=CPPUNIT_CFLAGS would be unconditional, and CPPUNIT_CFLAGS were set empty for the non-SYSTEM_CPPUNIT case in some solenv/inc/*.mk?) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:39:17 + 2010 --- 1 libs.mk CPPUNITLIB: For one, shouldn't the check for SYSTEM_CPPUNIT come before the check for WN (so that WNT could, at least in principle, also use SYSTEM_CPPUNIT)? no system-* will probably work on windows, nor would it make sense, so I wouldn't bother For another, the += in CPPUNITLIB += $(CPPUNIT_LIBS) is probably a typo. Yes. (And for a third, wouldn't it be better to replace CPPUNITLIB with CPPUNIT_LIBS everywhere and set it in libs.mk only if not SYSTEM_CPPUNIT?) Wanted to do it minimal-invasive, but we can do, yes. 2 What looks odd is that only sal/cppunittester/makefile.mk mentions CPPUNIT_CFLAGS, not the other makefiles that reference cppunit. I only noticed that one, will grep for the rest. they are for example? (And again, wouldn't it be better if the CFLAGS+=CPPUNIT_CFLAGS would be unconditional, and CPPUNIT_CFLAGS were set empty for the non-SYSTEM_CPPUNIT case in some solenv/inc/*.mk?) I don't think so, libs != includes, and we don't do that for any other system-* either - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:46:01 + 2010 --- Wanted to do it minimal-invasive, but we can do, yes. Besides that, we do that for other system-*, too (see the libxslt right below cppunit), so for consistency we should do it like in the initial patch IMHO 2 What looks odd is that only sal/cppunittester/makefile.mk mentions CPPUNIT_CFLAGS, not the other makefiles that reference cppunit. Do they need the includes (And it would for me either way as /usr/include is a standard path and this /usr/include/cppunit/* is found anyway without -I); cppunittester of course needs headers, the other occurances in sal are just linkages afaics. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:50:41 + 2010 --- Do they need the include answer to myself: yes, sal/qa/rtl/*.cxx - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from s...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 21:53:07 + 2010 --- I only noticed that one, will grep for the rest. they are for example?: e.g., o3tl/qa/makefile.mk; Do they need the includes: yes, they do Wanted to do it minimal-invasive, but we can do, yes., I don't think so, libs != includes, and we don't do that for any other system-* either, so for consistency we should do it like in the initial patch IMHO: True, we would start something new with this. But IMO something much better than the current conventions (e.g., I would have loved to have CXX/LDFLAGS_STLPORT available in the new cppunit/makefile.mk, and had to re-engineer them from the solenv/inc/*.mk mess). So, IMO, I would not mind deviating from old conventions here... - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 User rene changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |68135) new patch with typo | | fixes and adding the othe | |r makefiles --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 23:15:08 + 2010 --- Created an attachment (id=68135) new patch with typo fixes and adding the other makefiles - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 23:25:35 + 2010 --- s/libwpd/cppunit/ in configure.in of course, will not attach a new file for just that :-) .oO ( cut'n'waste ) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 109791] [cws sb118] system-cppuni t
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Wed Mar 3 23:33:19 + 2010 --- sb: any objection to push it like it is (+/- stuff I will find, a build runs currently) and do finetuning/improvements later? - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
