On July 30, 2019 2:21:49 PM CDT, Jean-Marc Pigeon via blfs-dev <[email protected]> wrote: >Hello Bruce, > >On 07/30/2019 02:50 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >> On 7/30/19 1:37 PM, Jean-Marc Pigeon via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On 07/30/2019 01:55 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >>>> On 7/30/19 12:39 PM, Jean-Marc Pigeon via blfs-dev wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Trying to compile libreoffice on 8.5 and get an autogen.sh error >>>>> >>>>> ;------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ....... >>>>> checking whether g++ supports -fno-default-inline... yes >>>>> checking whether g++ supports -fno-enforce-eh-specs... yes >>>>> checking for posix_fallocate... yes >>>>> checking whether to add custom build version... no >>>>> checking for java... no >>>>> checking the installed JDK... configure: error: Java not found. >You >>>>> need at least jdk-1.6 >>>>> Error running configure at ./autogen.sh line 296 >>>>> ;------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> According my understanding, only >>>>> Archive-Zip-1.64, UnZip-6.0, Wget-1.20.3, Which-2.21, and Zip-3.0 >>>>> are required to build libreoffice. >>>>> >>>>> Furthermore, I see no reference to java/jdk with recommended or >>>>> optional list. >>>>> >>>>> Seems there is no --without-jdk option.. >>>>> >>>>> Puzzled... >>>>> What is the detail I am overlooking? >>>>> >>>>> Any hint will be welcome.... >>>>> >>>>> Should "Java" added to the "required" dependencies within book >chapter >>>>> 39? >>>> >>>> Did you add --without-java to the ./autogen.sh options? I'll note >that >>>> if you installed the recommended apache-ant, then java was required >for >>>> that. >>>> >>>> -- Bruce >>>> >>> before my original post: Tried --without-jdk, no luck >>> your suggestion is a good one, --without-java allow me to go >further. >>> >>> My understanding of "required" seems not to be the good one. >>> To me required means, installing a system with the bare minimum (a >>> compiler), PLUS the required packages. The compilation will go on >and >>> the package will be working (may be without all bell and whistle, >but >>> working) . >>> >>> I didn't install apache-ant (on purpose). >>> According my (new) understanding of the libreoffice BLFS page, >>> build will integrate an "old version" of apache-ant, >>> which must have java. >>> (such Java become mandatory, and autogen.sh is complaining.... >>> To be consistent with itself, libreoffice should include and old >>> version of java too). >>> >>> May I suggest, to change a little bit the libreoffice page >>> and merge "Recommended" to "required". >>> Such the build could be run on a real and effective dependencies >list. >>> (a validated common ground) >>> >>> In the mid time, I will try to define the minimal libreoffice >>> dependencies >> >> >http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/stable/introduction/notes-on-building.html >> >> >> "Recommended means that BLFS strongly suggests this package is >installed >> first for a clean and trouble-free build, that won't have issues >either >> during the build process, or at run-time. The instructions in the >book >> assume these packages are installed. Some changes or workarounds may >be >> required if these packages are not installed. " >> > >I read again notes-on-building.html page and BLFS is not complying >with its own rule. >with only the required package >Archive-Zip-1.64, UnZip-6.0, Wget-1.20.3, Which-2.21, and Zip-3.0 >the java build defect shouldn't show up, but it is, this means >the required list is not "up to date" :; > >Lets go a little bit further. >The libreoffice autogen.sh include package as boost, harfbuzz, etc. >It is BLFS team privilege to say: >"To have a really working libreoffice, build need to have >with-system-harfbuzz with-system-boost, etc." > From the team stand point, those packages are "required". > >My way I would say (from BLSF prospective). >If a package is implied by the proposed build context (autogen.sh or >configure arguments), then the said package is mandatory/required. > >If the reader do not want some proposed build context and "mess" with >book directives he is on its own. >The book mantra is "If you follow given instructions, you should have >our same result".
No to all above. I believe you are trying to look at it from a functional perspective, where the book only looks at technical requirements. Maybe this helps: It is not _required_ to have Java to build LO, it will build just fine with an in-tree binary (or even without now days, IIRC, but loses severe functionality), but Java is needed to use the instructions that BLFS has _recommended_ for minimum expected functionality. --DJ -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
