On July 30, 2019 3:01:18 PM CDT, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev <[email protected]> wrote: >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
I should also mention that the user confusion, and the later discussion that led us to that definition was exceptionally thorough. That definition has been in place since before BLFS-6.0 for those reasons. I'm unable to search the archives at the moment, but it is definitely worth reading if you still feel differently, as I'm reasonably confident that you would ultimately come to the same conclusion. --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
