[RESULT] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.5-RC1 as GA

The Final Tally: +1 (binding): Jim Jagielski Keith N. McKenna Matthias Seidel Patricia Shanahan Carl Marcum Marcus Lange Roberto Galoppini +1 (non-binding) Kay Schenk Kazunari Hirano So with more than the sufficient 3 +1 (binding) votes and no vetos

Re: Ubuntu 14.04

> On Dec 16, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > > Hi Jim, > >> Playing around w/ building 4.1.5 and 4.2.0 on Ubuntu 14.04... >> Will update the wiki as required (already found 2 dependencies >> we were missing) > > This is good news, as this is the platform used by

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.5-RC1 as GA

Just a reminder that the vote will be open for only another ~16hrs > On Dec 18, 2017, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenOffice 4.1.5-RC1 > as GA!! > > You can find these gems at: > >https://

Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.5-RC1 as GA

+1 (binding) > On Dec 18, 2017, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > I am calling a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenOffice 4.1.5-RC1 > as GA!! > > You can find these gems at: > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.5-RC1/ &g

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.5-RC1 as GA

I am calling a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenOffice 4.1.5-RC1 as GA!! You can find these gems at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.5-RC1/ The vote will last at least the normal 72 hours. Cheers! -- Jim Jagielski On behalf of the Apache OpenOffice Project

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Availability of AOO-4.1.5 RC1

I'll give it the weekend and maybe call a VOTE on Monday. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Ubuntu 14.04

Playing around w/ building 4.1.5 and 4.2.0 on Ubuntu 14.04... Will update the wiki as required (already found 2 dependencies we were missing) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Availability of AOO-4.1.5 RC1

FTR: All good on my baseline testing on macOS 10.7, 10.12 and 10.13, CentOS5 and 6 and Win7 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

[ANNOUNCE] Availability of AOO-4.1.5 RC1

at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.5-RC1/ Upon successful, positive feedback, a VOTE on blessing RC1 as GA will likely be forthcoming. Cheers! -- Jim Jagielski On behalf of the Apache OpenOffice Project

Re: [STATUS] AOO 4.1.5-RC1 builds

THANKS!! > On Dec 13, 2017, at 5:30 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > wrote: > > Windows uploads are complete now! ;-) > > Am 12.12.2017 um 15:18 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> The AOO 4.1.5-RC1 builds for macOS, Linux 64bit and >> Linux 32bit a

[STATUS] AOO 4.1.5-RC1 builds

The AOO 4.1.5-RC1 builds for macOS, Linux 64bit and Linux 32bit are now available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.5-RC1/ Once we have the Windows builds also available, I'll call a VOTE. - To

Re: [PROPOSAL] Start process for AOO 4.1.5-RC1

ith Rev. 1817496. > > I think this is the revision for RC1? > > Regards, Matthias > > > Am 08.12.2017 um 17:40 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Assuming no blockers, my plan is to start Linux and macOS RC1 builds >> on Mond

Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

I had not voted yet, but with the below, my selection process is a lot easier. I'll also cast by vote to Peter. > On Dec 8, 2017, at 6:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: > > When I first got in I thought Peter preferred to wait until next year. > > However since he is up for it, and

Re: [PROPOSAL] Start process for AOO 4.1.5-RC1

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 4:22 PM, Marcus wrote: > > > We have a process which was working good in the past, so let's use it. Then > it's also easier to tracker the real changes and document them in the Release > Notes. > FTR: ++1

Re: [PROPOSAL] Start process for AOO 4.1.5-RC1

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 3:33 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > I propose that we, "officially", start the ball > rolling in the process of releasing AOO 4.1.5. > > As such, I encourage people to follow and > edit (as needed): > >

Re: 4.2.0: Baseline CentOS6 as reference build platform

Who has write access to that? > On Dec 4, 2017, at 8:28 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org> wrote: > > Why don't we post that on our www.openoffice.org blog? > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> http://ji

Re: 4.2.0: Baseline CentOS6 as reference build platform

http://jimjag.com/imo/index.php?/archives/272-The-Path-to-Apache-OpenOffice-4.2.0.html <http://jimjag.com/imo/index.php?/archives/272-The-Path-to-Apache-OpenOffice-4.2.0.html> > On Dec 4, 2017, at 7:35 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > Sounds like a good

Re: 4.2.0: Baseline CentOS6 as reference build platform

Sounds like a good topic for a blog post... Our current discussions regarding 4.2.0 and Linux. > On Dec 4, 2017, at 7:25 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote: > > Are there users who want CentOS5 builds? > > Am 4. Dezember 2017 13:23:39 MEZ schrieb Jim Jagielski <j

Re: 4.2.0: Baseline CentOS6 as reference build platform

e still let you > build with Gnome VFS instead of GIO. > > I didn't take GIO out of the build, I just switched the default VFS > implementation from Gnome VFS to GIO. > > Damjan > > On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

017, at 5:06 PM, Marcus <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: > > Am 03.12.2017 um 22:54 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> On Dec 3, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> How do we then distinguish one beta build from another? By Build number?

Re: [PROPOSAL] Start process for AOO 4.1.5-RC1

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I propose that we, "officially", start the ball >> rolling in the process of releasing AOO 4.1.5. > > Are you accepting blockers? I am, yes

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

; all beta specials and build a last production version and that will be voted > on. > > By this we have simple names, every one can follow, plus we do not break our > work process. > > All the best > Peter > > Am 3. Dezember 2017 18:40:23 MEZ schrieb Jim Jagielski &l

[PROPOSAL] Start process for AOO 4.1.5-RC1

I propose that we, "officially", start the ball rolling in the process of releasing AOO 4.1.5. As such, I encourage people to follow and edit (as needed): https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5 with the goal of getting a 4.1.5-RC1 out "kinda soon" :)

Re: Updating the build guide (Re: a more sane way to override optimization flags in gbuild)

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 1:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > Keith N. McKenna wrote: >> That begs the Question should we add a section to the overall build >> guide for CentOS6? If yes I can add the section as a clone of the >> CentOS5 Guide with all the proper warnings and

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > On 12/3/2017 6:50 AM, Marcus wrote: >> Am 03.12.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC for for >>> Release Candidate plus a number. So the first

4.2.0: Baseline CentOS6 as reference build platform

> On Dec 3, 2017, at 1:16 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> >>> On Dec 2, 2017, at 5:56 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: >>>

Re: a more sane way to override optimization flags in gbuild

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 5:56 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 30/11/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I think for 4.2.x and later, we have deprecated CentOS5 as a supported >> build system... I ran into a LOT of issues. > > Such as, for example

Re: A more sane way to build - SCons, deCygwination and other hopes

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 1:59 PM, Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> Playing devils advocate, does it make sense to introduce >> Yet Another Build System at this stage? &

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

office/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/pack.lst > > Don't know if there is a better way... > > Maybe you can see more in: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk > > Regards, Matthias > > > Am 02.12.20

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

= Entering /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv dmake: Error: -- Don't know how to make `openofficebeta' > On Dec 2, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > wrote: > > Am 02.12.2017 um 15:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> On Dec 2, 2017,

Re: A more sane way to build - SCons, deCygwination and other hopes

Playing devils advocate, does it make sense to introduce Yet Another Build System at this stage? Also, there are a few projects that I know of that use SCons. In general, one of the most popular common threads related to them are "Why the hell are you using SCons?" :) > On Dec 2, 2017, at 3:05

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:44 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 02.12.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Marcus: >> Am 02.12.2017 um 13:22 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Despite of the name it could be the icon of the dmg file? I don't >>> know where this icon set is visible... ;-)

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the >> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is >> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain >> the relationship. >> >> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

I created it on Windows with a program called "iConvertIcons" and had no > chance to test it. > > Regards, Matthias > > > Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available >> (http://home.apac

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 9:35 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > Switching positions, the last time we discussed release planning, 11/22, > Damjan needed a month or two to finish PostgreSQL driver work before he would > recommend releasing 4.2.0. That seems more like early next year,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

an explain the > relationship. > > On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is >> fantastic! >> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz >> and see what, if anything, wo

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

ide builds for all 4 platforms. > On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde <o...@mechtilde.de> wrote: > > Hello > > I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead. > > Regards > > Mechtilde > > Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ ) for some langs > On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:

Re: security fixes in trunk

> On Nov 30, 2017, at 11:07 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > The changes must not be committed as is, because that would undo some comment > translation. yes, of course. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

10 / 2 > > Same machine works with 4.1.5 build w/Apple Java6 legacy and latest Oracle > Java8. > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Nov 27, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> The two 4.1.4 ma

Re: security fixes in trunk

Thx! Looking over, I does appear to me that these need to be committed to trunk. > On Nov 27, 2017, at 10:44 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > > When I diff the files that were changed for security reasons in 4.1.4 > (this is actually 4.1.5 since I have a fresh checkout handy) vs.

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

egacy Apple > Java 6. Database then worked. 4.1.4 worked without having the legacy Apple > Java 6 installed on my computer. I have the latest Java 9 installed. 4.2.0 > sees Java 9 in the preferences but won't open database without legacy Java. > > Larry > > On 2017-11-27, 1

Re: a more sane way to override optimization flags in gbuild

I think for 4.2.x and later, we have deprecated CentOS5 as a supported build system... I ran into a LOT of issues. So, imo, any fix that is *specific* for CentOS5 should be discounted. For 4.1.x, I'd prefer something which is a quick and easy fix, rather than something that touches a lot of build

Re: a more sane way to override optimization flags in gbuild

> On 28 Nov, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Wouldn't it make sense to do something like LOCAL_CFLAGS which >> could then be manipulated?... > > It depends on what the goal is. What would be nice is if debug flags > and optimization flags could be specified from the environment

Re: a more sane way to override optimization flags in gbuild

Wouldn't it make sense to do something like LOCAL_CFLAGS which could then be manipulated?... What I might do is commit this and then work on that ;) > On Nov 28, 2017, at 4:42 AM, Don Lewis wrote: > > Here's a gbuild patch vs. trunk r1816518 that makes setting optimization

Re: svn commit: r1815700 - /openoffice/trunk/main/framework/Library_fwk.mk

I just went ahead and activated it for MACOSX. We can always adjust as needed. > On Nov 27, 2017, at 1:30 PM, Don Lewis <truck...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 27 Nov, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> % cc --version >> Apple LLVM version 7.3.0 (clang-703.0.31) >> Target: x8

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

Test builds for 4.2.0-dev for Linux64, Windows and macOS are now available at: http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816311/

Re: svn commit: r1815700 - /openoffice/trunk/main/framework/Library_fwk.mk

% cc --version Apple LLVM version 7.3.0 (clang-703.0.31) Target: x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0 Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /Applications/Xcode7.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin Thx! > On Nov 26, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > >

Re: another bug in base

Do we need/want a FreeBSD build VM? I could try to set one up... > On Nov 26, 2017, at 6:47 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > > I'm seeing another bug in base on all versions of FreeBSD. To > reproduce: > 1. Open an existing database > 2. Select Table in the far left pane > 3.

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

should be fixed now. > On Nov 26, 2017, at 5:54 AM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> > wrote: > > Am 26.11.2017 um 00:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I am uploading to: >> >>http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ >> <http://home.

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

I am uploading to: http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 4.2.0-dev builds for Linux64 and Windows... After that will come Linux32 and macOS (assuming it builds... I've had issues before). These are based on HEAD of trunk, ~r1816311. The Linux

Re: Jim's Windows7 issues solved!?

Yeah, I'll update the build instructions as needed. > On Nov 22, 2017, at 11:17 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > > Do we need an update to the instructions to clarify that? > > On 11/22/2017 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I think I finally tracked

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

I have my 2 CentOS6 build VMs up and running. I am attempting to build 4.2.0 (trunk) on the 64bit CentOS 6.9 VM 1st. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

nomeVFS was deprecated 9 years ago. Make GIO, its replacement, > the default searched by configure.ac instead. > > > > If we really need GnomeVFS back, we can revert that commit, or use > ./configure switches to favor GnomeVFS over GIO. > > Damjan > > > >

Re: AOO 4.1.5-dev builds

> On Nov 23, 2017, at 6:06 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > > There are serious regressions in 4.1.4 for Macs. The fix needs to be released > now, not wait until 4.2.0 > And at least 1 fix that address all platforms as well, so I do think a 4.1.5 will be required. Also,

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

I thought we add all dependencies to the build process. (thats why our build > takes ages.) > I thought the only distibution dependency is the build environment. > Maybe I am wrong. If so I do not understand how CentOS5 can be compatible to > everything else. > > On 24.11.2017 16:23, J

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

> On Nov 23, 2017, at 12:43 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Rory, > > Am 23.11.2017 um 18:31 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: >> I have downloaded and install AO0 4.2.0 for linux from >>

Re: AOO 4.1.5-dev builds

And in honor of the (US) Holiday, I am uploading to http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ Windows builds for 4.1.5 (just the subset of langs). This not only allows for tests of 4.1.5 for Windows users but also that my Windows build setup is (finally) viable! Cheers!

Jim's Windows7 issues solved!?

I think I finally tracked down the problem w/ my Win7/cygwin build problems. It was subtle. I kept all my sources in /home/jim/src/asf/AOO415 that is, it lived under the cygwin file-system. What I discovered is that the source actually needs to live under C:, e.g.: C:/jim/src/asf/AOO415

Re: [Issue 127601] New: DDE Fields

> On Nov 20, 2017, at 6:37 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > This should be tested on 4.1.5-dev. Is there going to be a Windows build? > I should really try to figure out how to do a Windows build for testing purposes :)

Re: AOO 4.1.5-dev builds

Permissions should be fixed now. Thx. and Sorry :) > On Nov 20, 2017, at 11:01 AM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:49:24 -0500 > Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> I have both macOS and Linux-64bit builds of 4.1.5-

AOO 4.1.5-dev builds

I have both macOS and Linux-64bit builds of 4.1.5-dev (HEAD on the AOO415 branch) available for fun and games (and testing) at: http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ I've built all langs but have just uploaded: de, en-US, es, fr and ja (for now). Let me know if people want/need others

Re: URGENT: Need to build new version based on 4.1.4

does not crash. I >> suspect it would not necessarily pick the right parent window if multiple >> windows are open. >> On 11/19/2017 7:11 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> Just to be clear: >>> >>> SetUserAllowsLinkUpdate(pLink, GetUserAllowsLin

Re: URGENT: Need to build new version based on 4.1.4

Just to be clear: SetUserAllowsLinkUpdate(pLink, GetUserAllowsLinkUpdate(parent)); is OK if parent == NULL? That is, does GetUserAllowsLinkUpdate() work OK if passed NULL? Or, if parent is NULL, should we skip calling SetUserAllowsLinkUpdate()? > On Nov 18, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Patricia

Re: URGENT: Need to build new version based on 4.1.4

I think together is best. :) > On Nov 18, 2017, at 6:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: > > I see you have checked in some Mac building changes. Would it be better to > keep the two fixes separate, or encourage testing both of them together? > > On 11/18/201

Re: URGENT: Need to build new version based on 4.1.4

We do have the AOO415 branch! :) > On Nov 18, 2017, at 2:11 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > There is a bug in my LinkManager changes. Specifically, I made the totally > newbie mistake of accessing memory based on a pointer without allowing for it > being null, and it turns out

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

Nov 18, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > fingers-crossed... > > I have updated the files in devtools related to my successful build of AOO > 4.1.4 > for macOS that appears to fix both regressions. > > Basically: > > o I had to

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

fingers-crossed... I have updated the files in devtools related to my successful build of AOO 4.1.4 for macOS that appears to fix both regressions. Basically: o I had to use Xcode7 on Sierra o I had to compile frameworks w/ -O1 instead of -O2 Uploads to our dev dist repo are happening as we

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

at 11:06 AM, Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> What is your base for determine the build environment? >>> >>> I want to make time next week to try to build on my MacBook. Maybe I >> can come up with something. But no promises. >>> &

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

ing the following patch? If so, is the patch still > necessary? > > /openoffice/branches/AOO414/main/hsqldb/patches/i121754.patch > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Nov 16, 2017, at 12:15 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com >> <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wro

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

t; +configure:22394: result: /usr/local/share/java/apache-ant/bin/ant > > (6) TARFILE_LOCATIONS environment variable: > -TARFILE_LOCATION='/Users/jsc/dev/svn/aoo410/ext_sources' > +TARFILE_LOCATION='DEFAULT' > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Nov 16, 2017, at 10:40 AM, Jim

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

OK, I am pretty much almost out of ideas. I've created a VM which is almost an exact match for what I could determine was the build environ for 4.1.2. Attached is a patch file that shows the diffs between the config.out for 4.1.2 and my build of 4.1.2. My build doesn't suffer from the corrupted

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

I have a 10.9/Mavericks with Xcode 6.2 VM up and running. I am building 4.1.4 on it as we speak. Will let people know asap. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

>> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1. That makes great sense. >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>>> On Nov 12, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>&

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

Does it make sense to "release" the version that fixes the chart problem, while we work on the one that tries to address the table/database issue? I would assume that there are more people who want/need 4.1.4 and would be affected by the chart diagram issue than those who would be affected by the

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

Just a FYI that I am trying various permutations of libxml2 and lbxslt to try to resolve the issue... > On Nov 10, 2017, at 6:33 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > Anyone have any idea why these 2 issues would be so > dependent on the xml2/xslt libraries being use

Re: FYI: The OO 4.1.4 Mac problem

Anyone have any idea why these 2 issues would be so dependent on the xml2/xslt libraries being used?? > On Nov 9, 2017, at 1:18 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > > > For information: the Mac 4.1.4 chart problem is starting to surface on the > Forum - there have been several reports

Latest test macOS builds

Located at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/macOS-4.1.4-20171106a/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Okey dokey... I *think* that having xml2 built w/ iconv was, in fact, the issue. Double checking as we speak. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

k/usr/include/libxml2' > LIBXSLT_LIBS='-L/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.12.sdk/usr/lib -lxslt -lxml2 -lz -lpthread -licucore -lm' > On Nov 6, 2017, at 12:43 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > Con

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Considering that it was the xml2/xslt libs that changed between the version, I am focusing my attention on that. The pervious version, that broke embedded charts but worked with the table used/linked macOS's libs. This latest version uses local libs; which looks to have fixed the embedded chart

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

yep > On Nov 5, 2017, at 5:49 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I am wondering if this means/requires that the build machine >> MUST be running 10.12 (Sierra). > > The original report https://bz.apache.or

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Another possible useful link: o http://support.cocoatech.com/discussions/problems/43623-crashes-under-the-new-sierra-10122-update/page/3 I am wondering if this means/requires that the

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

, but it would be nice to have at least some prelim basic idea of where some useful breakpoints should be set. > On Nov 3, 2017, at 5:21 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > Copying here: > > This is interesting... > > When opening the Base file I get the follo

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Copying here: This is interesting... When opening the Base file I get the following in /var/log/system.log: 596:Nov 3 10:29:19 Daves-MacBook-Pro soffice[70777]: assertion failed: 16G29: libxpc.dylib + 74307 [BF896DF0-D8E9-31A8-A4B3-01120BFEEE52]: 0x89 597:Nov 3 10:29:22 Daves-MacBook-Pro

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Following up in Bugz... cannot recreate. > On Nov 3, 2017, at 7:45 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > Created an issue in Bugzilla https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127580 > *Issue 127580* -Fix > forIssue 127568

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/macOS-4.1.4-20171101/ > On Nov 1, 2017, at 6:15 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: > > May I have a URL for the repaired Mac version of 4.1.4 (or a copy of the >

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

I have replacement macOS builds available which solve this problem. There were no source code changes required: it was simply an issue with the build environment itself. As such, these new builds have the same version numbers, just different build dates. I'd like to propose that we open up these

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

So the only thing that will indicate the new version will be an updated date in the About page? > On Oct 31, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 14:09:46 -0400 > Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com <mailto:j...@jagunet.com

Re: [Build] XCode 8.3.3 / 4.1.4 - quicktime.h header missing

Once I get the macOS stuff done, I'll update the Building on MacOSX page[1]. I am trimming out all local mods to the bare bones. 1. https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Building_on_MacOsX

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

31, 2017, at 2:03 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > It would be easy to bump the build number 414m6 just for macOS. > Of course, the date is also changed, even if we keep the same > build number. > > I am up for whatever makes sense. The issue is that it's &g

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

ople know to upgrade? >>> This issue makes me think we need to have this be a new version so that we >>> can setup the upgrade service correctly. >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>>>

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Question: Assuming we have "correction" builds available, what do we do? Simply replace the online version with these? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Nope. This is virgin Xcode7 $ sudo xcode-select -s /Applications/Xcode7.app > On Oct 31, 2017, at 12:02 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Any use of XcodeLegacy in your Xcode7 setup? > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Oct

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

This is what I'm thinking... by using the system xml/xslt, instead of bundling it, we are getting some weird interactions. < LIBXML_CFLAGS='-I/usr/local/include/libxml2' --- >

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

OK, I *think* I found it... it looks like it is a XML/xslt issue where the 10.12 SDK, even though it is not used, the XML libs from it are. Downgrading from Xcode8 to Xcode7 looks to resolve that. Build 4.1.3 using Xcode7 worked (no corrupt).

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Looking over how 4.1.2 was built I will admit that I am totally confused. According to the config.out file it was built on an 8-core MacBook, running Mavericks (10.9) but with an Xcode that supported the 10.10 SDK... which is basically impossible. Xcode6, which is the 1st one to support the 10.10

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

Hmmm... the default memory allocator seems to have changed between 4.1.2 and 4.1.4 from internal to system. Checking... > On Oct 30, 2017, at 9:51 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > That is what I am thinking... looking at the config.out > diff betwe

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

That is what I am thinking... looking at the config.out diff between 4.1.2 and 4.1.4... > On Oct 30, 2017, at 8:43 PM, Don Lewis <truck...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 30 Oct, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> So building 4.1.3 also results in the same behavior >> as 4.1.4..

Re: Issue for 4.1.4 and MacOS

So building 4.1.3 also results in the same behavior as 4.1.4... so it is almost assuredly a build issue. Assuming it is an SDK issue, I am trying to build w/ Xcode5... Will keep everyone posted. > On Oct 30, 2017, at 4:29 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > Building f

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >