Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-09 Thread Mike Hommey
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 10:58:11PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Mike Hommey wrote:
  On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:26:34AM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL 
  PROTECTED] wrote:
   There's no big difference in using hunspell and myspell, except that 
   hunspell dictionaries
   then will also work. And you show that hunspell is used so the security 
   team knows
   that mozilla needs to be rebuilt (which probably won't happen, no one 
   ever found a security bug
   in either hunspell or myspell). And in any case, there's already enchant 
   and openoffice.org building
   with static hunspell (openoffice.org does build far longer than ice*)
  
  How does the security team feel about having to rebuild iceape,
  iceweasel, icedove (you forgot to file a bug on icedove), OOo and enchant
 
 No, that would have been my next target (the source already is on my
 disk)
 
  if there happens to be a security bug in hunspell ?
 
 I am sure there won't be, but if it happens it happens. There's some
 static libs in Debian where this is the case, afaik. Of course. not having to
 do that is better, but...
 
  How do buildds feel to have to rebuild iceape, iceweasel, icedove, OOo
  and enchant for every hunspell upload ?
 
 You don't have to.

So when you fix bugs in hunspell, you want to leave the bugs in the
programs that are statically linked to it. How great.

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-09 Thread Davide Prina

Rene Engelhard wrote:
 MySpell is obsolete.
 Please build against Hunspell, which is an improved version of MySpell
 retaining full backwards compatibility. That also would make the usage
 of hunspell-de-* in iceweasel possible.

probably not so full backwards compatibility.

 [ The Problem is that hunspell-de-* is an improved version of the
 MySpell dict for hunspell and it's working in OOo since it uses
 Hunspell

also Italian dictionary in Debian is a very old release ... so obsolete 
than a lot of people ask me to correct a lot of errors, errors that are 
already corrected in the last version.
I think that Debian is the last GNU/Linux distro that have a so old 
Itailian dictionary version.


The last Italian dictionary under GPL license can be downloaded from 
here (2.3 beta 23/07/2006):

http://linguistico.sf.net/wiki/doku.php?id=dizionario_italiano

I have reported a whishlist for that #329971 at Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 
23:04:33 +0200


For Italian language there is also a surname dictionary, also it under 
GPL, that can be found here:

http://linguistico.sf.net/wiki/doku.php?id=dizionario_cognomi_italiani

I don't see the hurry to have hunspell used on all programs ... if it is 
so hard or impossible to have recent dictionaries in Debian that are 
other languages than English or maintainer mother language.


Mike Hommey wrote:

On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 10:58:11PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:

Mike Hommey wrote:



if there happens to be a security bug in hunspell ?



I am sure there won't be, but if it happens it happens. There's some
static libs in Debian where this is the case, afaik. Of course. not having to
do that is better, but...


How do buildds feel to have to rebuild iceape, iceweasel, icedove, OOo
and enchant for every hunspell upload ?

You don't have to.


So when you fix bugs in hunspell, you want to leave the bugs in the
programs that are statically linked to it. How great.


I have reported some hunspell bugs to László (I don't know if some can 
be security bugs). I don't know if they are already corrected (László 
have told me: I hope, I will solve the problem this month for OOo 2.1).
For example hunspell can generate more strings or more time the same 
string than myspell starting from the same dictionary.


For hunspell there isn't a program that expand all the dictionary, so it 
is very hard to know if it work as you expected.


Ciao
Davide




Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-09 Thread Mike Hommey
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 01:13:27PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 I do. There's hunspell dictionaries in Debian which have to conflict
 against all mozillas...

I fail to see why. Are the hunspell dictionaries in
/usr/share/myspell/dicts or what ?

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-08 Thread Rene Engelhard
Hi,

Mike Hommey wrote:
 On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:49:12AM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 wrote:
  Because of this. Binaries which link to a SONAME which only exist in
  distributions inventing a SONAME don't work elsewhere. Binaries built
  on Fedora (and Debian if i'd apply it if shared libs' future in hunspell
  is uncertain) are not able to use it somewhere else where only the
  normal upstream contents are packaged. Of course, binary-only things
  suck and you most times have the source to rebuild it, but...
 
 Debian doesn't guaranty binary compatibility of its binaries with other
 distributions.

I know, but that is not an argument to deliberately break it.
If a incompatibility happens, ok, but...

  (...)
  What is your argument exactly for not linking to link against that static
  lib? Only because it's static? That argument IMHO doesn't really
  score...
  Many things link against static libs - simply becaus ethere's no shared
  lib (yet) upstream.
  
  My points are:
  - you are blocking usage of superior dicts (hunspell-*) elsewhere
(OOo, enchant/abiword) by not supporting hunspell in Ice* for those
that use OOo or enchant/abiword and some Ice animal.
(And I want to get myspell removed for etch+1...)
 
 OTOH, you are blocking better hunspell for ... no reason.

I am currently blocking a shared library only (and I din't think
blocking fits it at all since plain upstream does not have any shared
library).
That doesn't improve hunspell (as the engine) in any way. The effect also
is there with the static library and when hunspell finally has a shared lib
you can build against that.

And in any case, adding a new shared lib now is too late for etch anyway
whereas linking with hunspell can be done for etch still.

 Also note what you are asking is not (yet) supported by mozilla.

So what? The only thing I change is to exchange MySpell through the
API-compatible (except the class name) and improved hunspell. Behaviour
of the interface doesn't change, but the spellchecking gets better.

That Mozilla itself uses an obsolete spellchecking engine (they took
myspell from OOo, but didn't do it with hunspell, which was becoming
default with OOo 2.0.2 in March) is bad, yes, but that's no reason
to block this.

Hunspell is completely compatible; you can re-use your old myspell
dicts, too.

Gr??e/Regards,

Ren?
-- 
 .''`.  Ren? Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-08 Thread Mike Hommey
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:12:47PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Mike Hommey wrote:
  On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:49:12AM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL 
  PROTECTED] wrote:
   Because of this. Binaries which link to a SONAME which only exist in
   distributions inventing a SONAME don't work elsewhere. Binaries built
   on Fedora (and Debian if i'd apply it if shared libs' future in hunspell
   is uncertain) are not able to use it somewhere else where only the
   normal upstream contents are packaged. Of course, binary-only things
   suck and you most times have the source to rebuild it, but...
  
  Debian doesn't guaranty binary compatibility of its binaries with other
  distributions.
 
 I know, but that is not an argument to deliberately break it.
 If a incompatibility happens, ok, but...
 
   (...)
   What is your argument exactly for not linking to link against that static
   lib? Only because it's static? That argument IMHO doesn't really
   score...
   Many things link against static libs - simply becaus ethere's no shared
   lib (yet) upstream.
   
   My points are:
   - you are blocking usage of superior dicts (hunspell-*) elsewhere
 (OOo, enchant/abiword) by not supporting hunspell in Ice* for those
 that use OOo or enchant/abiword and some Ice animal.
 (And I want to get myspell removed for etch+1...)
  
  OTOH, you are blocking better hunspell for ... no reason.
 
 I am currently blocking a shared library only (and I din't think
 blocking fits it at all since plain upstream does not have any shared
 library).
 That doesn't improve hunspell (as the engine) in any way. The effect also
 is there with the static library and when hunspell finally has a shared lib
 you can build against that.
 
 And in any case, adding a new shared lib now is too late for etch anyway
 whereas linking with hunspell can be done for etch still.

Adding a new shared lib is too late but doing untested and unsupported
things is not. mwarf.

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-08 Thread Rene Engelhard
Mike Hommey wrote:
  And in any case, adding a new shared lib now is too late for etch anyway
  whereas linking with hunspell can be done for etch still.
 
 Adding a new shared lib is too late but doing untested and unsupported
 things is not. mwarf.

A shared lib is a new package and enchant, OOo etc will build against it
and blocked behind it if a upload should be necessary (and those things
will be linked against it)
This is a difference to ice* where you just rebuildit with an improved
spellchecking engine.
[ If I decide to not keep libhunspell_pic.a when there's a
libhunspell.so, OOo will even FTBFS currently when libhunspell_pic's
gone and needs an upload, too, otherwise OOo will not,  but enchant
will. ]
Adding a new shared library which has he potential to block RC fixes
because stuff now suddenly link against that (and a upload adding the
shared lib will have to go through NEW and wait 10 days and...)

The hunspell patch *is* tested. I use it here on my iceweasel without problems.
I of course built iceape with this patch and it seems to work fine, too.
As already said, Hunspell is completely API-compatible with MySpell except
the class name. The unsupported argument doesn't  m ake sense either,
plain Mozilla doesn't even support sharing the dictionaries between all
MySpell supported apps...

Hunspell itself is tested long time in unstable, both the library and
the hunspell program. Hunspell's the *native* spellchecking engine in
OOo since 2.0.2 (March!). OOo is not patched to support hunspell, it's
the native format. enchant is a wrapper for many libs, including
hunspell/myspell, calling that myspell.
enchant is the proof that just rebuilding with hunspell does *not* break
stuff.

Interesting you ignored all mine comments in my last mail because of
Mozilla doesn't support it even when you a) patch system-myspell in
yourself b) symlink myspell/ to the shared dictionaries. Both is good,
and anything else doesn't make sense for an integrated system but both
are not supported by mozilla either, are they?
You also seems to ignore that Hunspell is 100% compatible to MySpell.
No location change, no APi change, no whatever change (except the
class).

And you also seem to ignore my comment that I actually did build ice*
with hunspell and tried spellchecking...

Gr??e/Regards,

Ren?
-- 
 .''`.  Ren? Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-08 Thread Mike Hommey
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 09:52:39PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Interesting you ignored all mine comments in my last mail because of
 Mozilla doesn't support it even when you a) patch system-myspell in
 yourself b) symlink myspell/ to the shared dictionaries. Both is good,
 and anything else doesn't make sense for an integrated system but both
 are not supported by mozilla either, are they?

b) is not a big problem. The files are at the same place from iceape
point of view. And why do you think I did a) in the first place ? To
statically link another library instead of the one I externalized ?

 You also seems to ignore that Hunspell is 100% compatible to MySpell.
 No location change, no APi change, no whatever change (except the
 class).
 
 And you also seem to ignore my comment that I actually did build ice*
 with hunspell and tried spellchecking...

I too, test the software I package and don't find bugs. But yet, a lot
are filed.

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-07 Thread Rene Engelhard
[ also Cc'ing iceweasels bug ]

Am Donnerstag, 7. Dezember 2006 08:12 schrieben Sie:
 block 401969 by 324637
 thanks
[...] 
  MySpell is obsolete.
  Please build against Hunspell, which is an improved version of MySpell
  retaining full backwards compatibility. That also would make the usage
  of hunspell-de-* in iceweasel possible.
 (...)
 
 I won't do that until hunspell comes with a shared library.

And I won't add a shared library myself and invent a SONAME. (Like Fedora does).

(BTW, I'll probably remove MySpell after etch so then this is RC;
I consider building against system-hunspell (and telling that) still better
than building with an internal copy of MySpell)

Especially since Mozilla now doesn't support hunspell dicts but hunspell-* and
myspell-* have the same file. I guess I need to make hunspell-* conflict with 
any
Mozilla out there *sigh*)

There's no big difference in using hunspell and myspell, except that hunspell 
dictionaries
then will also work. And you show that hunspell is used so the security team 
knows
that mozilla needs to be rebuilt (which probably won't happen, no one ever 
found a security bug
in either hunspell or myspell). And in any case, there's already enchant and 
openoffice.org building
with static hunspell (openoffice.org does build far longer than ice*)

Regards,

Rene
-- 
 .''`.  René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73



Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell

2006-12-07 Thread Mike Hommey
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:26:34AM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 [ also Cc'ing iceweasels bug ]
 
 Am Donnerstag, 7. Dezember 2006 08:12 schrieben Sie:
  block 401969 by 324637
  thanks
 [...] 
   MySpell is obsolete.
   Please build against Hunspell, which is an improved version of MySpell
   retaining full backwards compatibility. That also would make the usage
   of hunspell-de-* in iceweasel possible.
  (...)
  
  I won't do that until hunspell comes with a shared library.
 
 And I won't add a shared library myself and invent a SONAME. (Like Fedora 
 does).

Why is that ? Not for binary compatibility, obviously (which is
generally the reason to not *change* a soname)

 (BTW, I'll probably remove MySpell after etch so then this is RC;
 I consider building against system-hunspell (and telling that) still better
 than building with an internal copy of MySpell)
 
 Especially since Mozilla now doesn't support hunspell dicts but hunspell-* and
 myspell-* have the same file. I guess I need to make hunspell-* conflict with 
 any
 Mozilla out there *sigh*)
 
 There's no big difference in using hunspell and myspell, except that hunspell 
 dictionaries
 then will also work. And you show that hunspell is used so the security team 
 knows
 that mozilla needs to be rebuilt (which probably won't happen, no one ever 
 found a security bug
 in either hunspell or myspell). And in any case, there's already enchant and 
 openoffice.org building
 with static hunspell (openoffice.org does build far longer than ice*)

It's not because it's done elsewhere that it's not a bad thing.

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]