Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
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
Rene Engelhard wrote: MySpell is obsolete.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#401969: please build using hunspell
Hi, Mike Hommey wrote: 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. Bullshit. You are intrepreting stuff everytime I didn't say. Not every fix in the package/packaging needs a rebuild, neither does a fix only affecting the hunspell program and not the library. In the library case, you're right. 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#401969: please build using hunspell
Hi, Davide Prina 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. Proof? 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 Irrelevant for this discussion. I can't add GPLed stuff to the package because it then would be GPL. The other dictionaries in the OOo source are LGPL, though. You can package it externally or make it build from the ispell one, but I will *not* include it in -dictionaries due it's being GPL. I told that in the bug report that it's G`PL and can't add it. If you don't read it/understand it and then complain, well... 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 GPL, too. See above. I don't see the hurry to have hunspell used on all programs ... if it is I do. There's hunspell dictionaries in Debian which have to conflict against all mozillas... I have reported some hunspell bugs to Láló don't know if some can be security bugs). I don't know if they are already corrected (Lálóve told me: I hope, I will solve the problem this month for OOo 2.1). Doubt that, there's no new hunspell release and neither does OOo 2.1 correct a new hunspell AFAIS (or he fixed the OOo h unspell copy and forgot the normal one..) No one claimed hunsppell hasn't got bugs but it's better than myspell overall. And it won't block usage of hunspell dictionaries in OOo. 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
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#401969: please build using hunspell
Rene Engelhard wrote: Davide Prina 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. Proof? for example this: ---8--FILE a.aff-8- SET ISO8859-15 TRY aioertnsclmdpgubzfvhàq'ACMSkBGPLxEyRTVòIODNwFéùèìjUZKHWJYQX SFX B Y 1 SFX B ere ono ere # p SFX p Y 2 SFX p o i o SFX p o e o ---8-8- ---8--FILE a.dic-8- 1 decidere/B ---8-8- ---8--FILE a.txt-8- decidere decidono decidoni decidone ---8-8- note that decidere/B must generate only decidono (with myspell), but hunspell generate also decidoni and decidone that are wrong Italian words. I have see that I can gain the same result with SFX B ere ono ere anystring p also if I write SFX B ere ono ere anystring abcdef than it is the same that write decidono/abcdef 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 Irrelevant for this discussion. I can't add GPLed stuff to the package because it then would be GPL. The other dictionaries in the OOo source are LGPL, though. I don't have ask to add it to the OOo source, but to the myspell-it package. You can package it externally or make it build from the ispell one, but I will *not* include it in -dictionaries due it's being GPL. If I don't have mistake I intend -dictionaries as a Debian package interesting ... so you can neither include the German dictionary ... it is under GPL license and non-GPL for package that support the OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications and whose PRIMARY format for saving documents is the Open Document Format I don't think icedove, iceweasel, ... respect this exception, so for all these the German dictionary is only GPL 2.0 or upper I think theare are lot of other dictionaries/thesaurus that have the same problem. I told that in the bug report that it's G`PL and can't add it. If you don't read it/understand it and then complain, well... where? when? querybts tell me: ---8---8---8---8---8 From: Rene Engelhard Subject: Re: Bug#329971: New Italian dictionary version available Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:45:45 +0200 [...] Aha. Hmm. And OOo 1.9.x/2.0 also contains only 2.1. Will look. When 1.9.x enters sid myspell-it will become 2.1 anyway and I'll look about updating the copy with 2.2. [...] Grüße/Regards, Rene ---8---8---8---8---8 note that the 2.2 version is GPL only Also the Italian thesaurus is only GPL and there is a recent version in Debian ... why? I have reported some hunspell bugs to Láló don't know if some can be security bugs). I don't know if they are already corrected (Lálóve told me: I hope, I will solve the problem this month for OOo 2.1). Doubt that, there's no new hunspell release and neither does OOo 2.1 correct a new hunspell AFAIS (or he fixed the OOo h unspell copy and forgot the normal one..) you can try the above example to check it Ciao Davide -- Dizionari: http://linguistico.sourceforge.net/wiki Client di posta: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird GNU/Linux User: 302090: http://counter.li.org Non autorizzo la memorizzazione del mio indirizzo su outlook
Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 10:32:50PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: How does the security team feel about having to rebuild iceape, iceweasel, icedove (you forgot to file a bug on icedove), OOo and enchant if there happens to be a security bug in hunspell ? In general having multiple packages needing a rebuild for a single security fix is a problem, and not something we'd like to have to deal with. (For a specific example think of the pdf/gs updates we had to make earlier in the year/last year. Lots of different programs with very similar code which didn't always get spotted at the same time.) A more recent example would be the links + elinks updates. Links was updated first then we updated elinks afterwards when we learnt there was shared code .. (Obvious in retrospect, but if there are a lot of packages which would require a rebuild keeping track of all of them can be difficult; especially if we don't know about it in advance.) Steve -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
Mike Hommey wrote: On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike Hommey wrote: 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 ? Yes. If the dictionaries are not compatible with myspell, why put them in /usr/share/*myspell* ? Has its reasons lying in the past. a) everything using myspell looked at this place and I of course wanted hunspell to look there where all myspell dicts are since they are 100% compatible and there are more myspell dicts there than new hunspell dicts b) OOo supports only *one* dir and *one* dictionary.lst for this. This could have been worked around by symlinking myspell dicts into /usr/share/hunspell/dicts, but more importantly, every dictionary has to be registered at /etc/openoffice/dictionary.lst. Which, due to OOo not caring about the FHS at all, is in /etc and /usr/share/myspell/dicts/dictionary.lst (where OOo expects it) is a symlink to that. Not to forget the additional xx-YY.* - xx_YY.dic symlinks you might want/need only for mozilla. (Note also that /usr/share/myspell/dicts isn't even sensible to set at OOo either, you need a symlink pointing to that, too) (/usr/lib/openoffice/share/dict/ooo - /usr/share/myspell/dicts). This would have been a maintenance nightmare. c) when hunspell (the ui interface) would look in /usr/share/hunspell it would not find any myspell dict unless you do the symlink farm from b) d) if you did the symlink farms in b) and c) the DSDT policy needed to get changed and every myspell package updated/NMUed. I didn't want to go that far yet... e) I hoped Mozilla upstream would adopt Hunspell quite fast (as they did with MySpell) in which case this wouldn't have been a problem after all. After I saw they didn't I sent the patch we're discussing about now only because you don't like static libs. 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#401969: please build using hunspell
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike Hommey wrote: 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 ? Yes. If the dictionaries are not compatible with myspell, why put them in /usr/share/*myspell* ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
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
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
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
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#401969: please build using hunspell
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. 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#401969: please build using hunspell
Hi, Mike Hommey wrote: 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 ? I think you did a) because you want to build against *system* myspell. (You btw didn't externalize it, I packaged it once for OOo, you just did the configure flag for mozilla) the change to The difference here is you don't use a copy of some lib in the source but using the stuff from the system. Whether that's static or dynamic it's not the main point (of course dynamic is better, I agree with that) 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. Yes, like the missing rm and CFLAGS (and using the internal myspell.hxx...). Can you tell me how using hunspell should break? Hunspell (the engine) is tested since months with OOo. mozilla will use the same library with the same API calls as it did for MySpell... 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#401969: please build using hunspell
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 if there happens to be a security bug in hunspell ? How do buildds feel to have to rebuild iceape, iceweasel, icedove, OOo and enchant for every hunspell upload ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#400621: Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
[ 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
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]
Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
Hi, Mike Hommey wrote: 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) 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... Anyway, the Fedora patch was now upstreamed to sourceforges tracker. If upstream adopts that one I will build a libhunspell-1.1-0 package. (tried that already, works) (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. 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...) - even with hunspell being static you point the security team that you link with it (not that a security update for hunspell should ever be necessary. so this isn't a problem either) - it won't change behaviour of the spellchecker (except improve it's ability to check words) 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#401969: please build using hunspell
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. (...) 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. Also note what you are asking is not (yet) supported by mozilla. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#401969: please build using hunspell
block 401969 by 324637 thanks On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 01:07:22AM +0100, Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: iceape Version: 1.0.6-1.1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Hi, 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. Mike PS: Note that I've been following upstream bug for hunspell support for a while. Not tested the patch from there, though. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
