Re: [VOTE] Release apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1 Source

2016-08-04 Thread Carl Marcum 

 +1 Approve

VERIFICATION...

I downloaded the patch from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.2-patch1/source/

$ md5sum --check apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.md5
apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip: OK

$ sha256sum --check apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.sha256
apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip: OK

$ gpg --verify apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.asc
...
gpg: Good signature from "Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) "
...

I copied the patched poly2.cxx from the zip file into 4.1.2 source downloaded 
from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/openoffice/4.1.2/source/

I built this patched AOO source with the following config on Fedora 20 x86-64:
./configure   \
--with-build-version="$(date +"%Y-%m-%d %H:%M") - `uname -sm`" \
--enable-verbose \
--with-system-stdlibs \
--enable-crashdump=yes \
--enable-category-b \
--enable-wiki-publisher \
--enable-bundled-dictionaries \
--enable-opengl  \
--enable-dbus  \
--enable-gstreamer \
--with-package-format="rpm deb" \
--with-lang="${LANGS}" \

--with-dmake-url=http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2
 \

--with-epm-url=http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz \
--with-jdk-home=/usr/java/jdk1.7.0_60

I uninstalled my existing AOO 4.1.2 and re-installed this build via rpm.

I ran the included smoketestdoc.swx document and ran the contained macro and 
got the same result as usual.
It failed on install extension as it has with previous tests.

Additionally I tested various new and existing documents and I am satisfied 
with the results.

Best regards,
Carl


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [TESTING] Applying openoffice-4.1.2-patch1 for Windows

2016-08-04 Thread Kay Schenk 


On 08/04/2016 02:21 PM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 08/03/2016 05:31 AM, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
>> Testing of an Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2-patch1 procedure is requested.
>>
>> The files to be used in testing are at
>> .
>>
>>

hmmm...well no zips for Mac, Linux32, or Linux 64 -- yet.

Should we get started on these?

>> The files to be tested and reviewed are
>>
>>   * README-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Windows.txt
>> The description of the procedure for applying a corrected
>> library file to installed copies of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2
>> on Windows.  Read this first before deciding to download
>> the Zip file and attempting the procedure.
> 
> wow, really? I think I need much more time for this than an average
> evening. ;-) I'll do the README steps on Sunday.
> 
>>   * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
>> The Zip archive containing the files to be used in the
>> procedure.  There is a copy of the README within the
>> archive as well.
> 
> - I've exchanged the DLL
> - Created a new text and presentation document with simple content.
> - Both were reopened successfully.
> 
> Anything more to test?
> 
>>   * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.asc
> 
> I don't know if this is OK or still bad:
> 
> gpg --verify apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.asc
> apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
> gpg: Signature made Tue 02 Aug 2016 06:24:08 AM CEST using RSA key ID
> D456628A
> gpg: Good signature from "keybase.io/orcmid (confirmed identifier)
> "
> gpg: aka "orcmid (Dennis E. Hamilton) "
> gpg: aka "orcmid Apache (code signing) "
> gpg: aka "Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid)
> "
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the
> owner.

I get this on sig checks also. There's probably a step we're missing to
specify "trust" locally.

See:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html



> 
>>   * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.md5
> 
> Windows 10 Home (Version 1511):
> I've visually compared the MD5 hashes from the ZIP and MD5 file
> --> OK
> 
> Linux:
> $ md5sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.md5
> --> OK
> 
>>   * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.sha256
> 
> Windows 10 Home (Version 1511):
> I've visually compared the SHA256 hashes from the ZIP and SHA256 file
> --> OK
> 
> Linux:
> $ sha256sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.sha256
> --> OK
> 
>> REQUESTED TESTING
>>
>>   * [OPTIONAL] If you are able to check any of the .asc,
>> .md5, and .sha256 files against the .zip, report any
>> difficulties that may have been encountered.
> 
> Please remove the new line at the end of the MD5 file. Otherwise it
> doesn't work on Linux:
> 
> md5sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.md5
> : No such file or directory.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
> : FAILED open or read.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
> md5sum: WARNING: 1 of 1 listed file could not be read
> 
>>   * If you performed the procedure, report
>>  * the version of Microsoft Windows and the type of
>>account used (administrator or standard user).
> 
> Windows 10 Home (Version 1511)
> Administrator
> 
>>  * report whether the procedure succeeded
> 
> Yes
> 
>>  * if the procedure failed or met with difficulties,
>>please summarize the problems and how you over-
>>came any of them
> 
> To do a quick check, I've used a shortcut:
> 
> I've used the Total Commander (started as administrator, a normal user
> cannot modify anything in the OpenOffice directory) and exchanged the DLL.
> 
>>   * [IMPORTANT] Identify any missing, incomplete or
>> confusing information in the README.  Describe what you
>> see as important improvements before making general
>> release of the procedure for use by non-expert users of
>> Apache OpenOffice on Windows.
> 
> Marcus
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 

-- 

MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
   -- Sigmund Freud

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [TESTING] Applying openoffice-4.1.2-patch1 for Windows

2016-08-04 Thread Marcus 

Am 08/03/2016 05:31 AM, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:

Testing of an Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2-patch1 procedure is requested.

The files to be used in testing are at
.

The files to be tested and reviewed are

  * README-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Windows.txt
The description of the procedure for applying a corrected
library file to installed copies of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2
on Windows.  Read this first before deciding to download
the Zip file and attempting the procedure.


wow, really? I think I need much more time for this than an average 
evening. ;-) I'll do the README steps on Sunday.



  * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
The Zip archive containing the files to be used in the
procedure.  There is a copy of the README within the
archive as well.


- I've exchanged the DLL
- Created a new text and presentation document with simple content.
- Both were reopened successfully.

Anything more to test?


  * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.asc


I don't know if this is OK or still bad:

gpg --verify apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.asc 
apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
gpg: Signature made Tue 02 Aug 2016 06:24:08 AM CEST using RSA key ID 
D456628A
gpg: Good signature from "keybase.io/orcmid (confirmed identifier) 
"

gpg: aka "orcmid (Dennis E. Hamilton) "
gpg: aka "orcmid Apache (code signing) "
gpg: aka "Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) 
"

gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
owner.



  * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.md5


Windows 10 Home (Version 1511):
I've visually compared the MD5 hashes from the ZIP and MD5 file
--> OK

Linux:
$ md5sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.md5
--> OK


  * apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.sha256


Windows 10 Home (Version 1511):
I've visually compared the SHA256 hashes from the ZIP and SHA256 file
--> OK

Linux:
$ sha256sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip.sha256
--> OK


REQUESTED TESTING

  * [OPTIONAL] If you are able to check any of the .asc,
.md5, and .sha256 files against the .zip, report any
difficulties that may have been encountered.


Please remove the new line at the end of the MD5 file. Otherwise it 
doesn't work on Linux:


md5sum -c apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip.md5
: No such file or directory.1.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
: FAILED open or read.2-patch1-apply-Win_x86.zip
md5sum: WARNING: 1 of 1 listed file could not be read


  * If you performed the procedure, report
 * the version of Microsoft Windows and the type of
   account used (administrator or standard user).


Windows 10 Home (Version 1511)
Administrator


 * report whether the procedure succeeded


Yes


 * if the procedure failed or met with difficulties,
   please summarize the problems and how you over-
   came any of them


To do a quick check, I've used a shortcut:

I've used the Total Commander (started as administrator, a normal user 
cannot modify anything in the OpenOffice directory) and exchanged the DLL.



  * [IMPORTANT] Identify any missing, incomplete or
confusing information in the README.  Describe what you
see as important improvements before making general
release of the procedure for use by non-expert users of
Apache OpenOffice on Windows.


Marcus

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [Forum] Upgrade signature string

2016-08-04 Thread Andrea Pescetti 

On 01/08/2016 FR web forum wrote:

Signature is checked in includes/ucp/ucp_register.php


I think I can disable it easily by simply ignoring the extra config 
variable you supply. But if you want to keep the feature and extend the 
regexp, then this must (as I understand it) be changed in the database. 
There is a good writeup at 
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE/phpBB3.0.4_Migration/Detailed_Implementation_Notes 
for the record.


So, I'll now send you in an offlist mail a ZIP file with the code we 
have in that directory. If you want to supply a modified version 
(basically, undoing the "Mod" we are applying now) just send it back to 
me; I'll review and apply. If you want instead to extend the range of 
OpenOffice derivatives we support as valid signatures, then this will 
need a DB change and a bit more investigation (but nothing particularly 
complex, it seems).


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: The WiderNet Project requests permission to use your product

2016-08-04 Thread Andrea Pescetti 

On 01/08/2016 Natasha Mencher wrote:

We are specifically requesting a donation of the following materials for future 
versions of the eGranary Digital Library:
Apache OpenOffice, located athttps://www.openoffice.org/
Please indicate the type of permission you wish to allow when responding to 
this message.


It seems that you don't need an explicit permission for the use of 
OpenOffice you would like to make: Apache OpenOffice is free software, 
distributed under the Apache License, version 2.


This very liberal license allows free redistribution in binary or source 
form. You can find a FAQ at 
http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html and the full license 
text at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt


I believe you will conclude that the license terms are enough and that 
you don't need an explicit permission beyond it. But if you have doubts 
feel free to contact us again. Use the dev list (I'm moving other lists 
to BCC to avoid useless traffic) or contact the OpenOffice PMC directly 
as instructed on this page: http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html


Regards,
  Andrea Pescetti - Apache OpenOffice PMC member.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1 Source

2016-08-04 Thread Kay Schenk 

On 08/02/2016 07:48 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> [BCC to PMC]
> 
> The Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2-patch1 source code mitigates the security 
> vulnerability described in the CVE-2016-1513 advisory 
> .
> 
> The patch has been applied in the building of modified Apache 4.1.2 binaries. 
>  The modified binaries have been successfully used as the source of single 
> modified shared-library files that can be copied into existing Apache 4.1.2 
> programs in order to eliminate the vulnerability.
> 
> This ballot is for release of the source code on which replacement or patched 
> Apache 4.1.2 binaries can be based.  The candidate source-code release for 
> patch1 is the archive 
> apache-openoffice-4.1.2-patch1.zip located at
> . 
> There are accompanying hash files (.md5 and .sha256) and a digital signature 
> file (.asc) for the source-code archive.
> 
> Please vote by reply to this dev@-list thread on the approval of the 
> candidate for release.
> 
>  [  ] +1 Approve, with description
+1 verified this was the patch I used for testing on CentOS 6.8, Linux-32
Checked md5 on download.

Verified sig as belonging to Dennis Hamilton.

>  [  ]  0 Abstain
>  [  ] -1 Disapprove, with explanation
> 
> For +1 Approve votes, please describe the results of verifying the patch 
> materials and success in building a 4.1.2 binary having the patch applied to 
> a particular 4.1.2 binary build.  
> 
> Please do not do anything but [VOTE] (with any +1 descriptions and -1 
> explanations) on this thread.
> 
> To discuss this vote or the process, please use a [DISCUSS][VOTE] reply 
> rather than discussing on the [VOTE] thread.
> 
> The [VOTE] will conclude no sooner than Monday, 2016-08-08T15:00Z.
> 
>  - Dennis E. Hamilton
>For the Apache OpenOffice Project Management Committee
> 

-- 

MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
   -- Sigmund Freud

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Merge with LibreOffice?

2016-08-04 Thread Fernando Cassia 
On 8/3/16, Christoph Reg  wrote:
> Greetings, dear AOO community.
>
> Please note first that this message is not supposed to be flaimbait or
> trolling of any kind.

It is. Have a nice day.

FC

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

[DISCUSS] on the road to 4.2 -- Critical Mac issue with Base on 4.1.2

2016-08-04 Thread Kay Schenk 
Hello all--
We're getting geared up for a 4.2 release. Lots to be done but at least now
ALL the buildbots are working -- YAY! -- so that will be a big help.

Do we have any further details/resolutions for Issue 126622?
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126622

Related to Java 8 or not, etc?

-- 
--
MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
-- Sigmund Freud

Re: Merge with LibreOffice?

2016-08-04 Thread toki 
On 03/08/2016 19:22, Phillip Rhodes wrote:

> Personally I think it would be ideal if the two projects could/would freely
> share code, but due to the license conflict, AOO can't reuse code
> from LO unless the author(s) is/are willing to also license it 

At this stage, there are enough differences between the two, that code
submitted to one of the projects usually has to be rewritten for other
project, which is usually fairly trivial.

I have not yet done my August "examine new extensions". In July, there
were roughly half a dozen extensions for LibO that were not installable
in AOo, with another half a dozen or so that were not testable, because
they were Windows only.

As far as templates go, there are two or three for LibO, that won't
function with AOo. (Mainly Calc. Major issue is column constraints in
AOo.) I'm not aware of any AOo templates that won't function with LibO.

jonathon


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org