Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors
tag 316951 + pending thanks Hi, Brian May wrote: When compiling on a Ubuntu system with gcc-4.0 4.0_4.0.0ds1-11 ported from Debian, I noticed some compile errors. I think some of these are applicable to Debian, so I am reporting my solutions here in case they can help others. Please do TEST whether it is applicable to Debian. This is the Debian BTS, not the Ubuntu one. i If it doesn't fail in Debian it's not really a problem for the Debian BTS (I do accept patches of course...). [ Well, in this case the first two are, the third is builder error... See below ] #1. configure script reported error that it can't find jni.h. I found this was because jni.h is located under the gcc 4.0 include directory: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/cache/pbuilder/result$ dpkg -c libgcj6-dev_4.0.0-11.ivt.1_i386.deb | grep jni.h -rw-r--r-- root/root 62692 2005-07-04 17:22:24 ./usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.0.1/include/jni.h Meaning it can only be found by gcc-4.0.1. However, debian/rules was still using 3.4. It uses java-gcj-compats jni.h symlink. It should work on Debian but I did not test it anymnore with m108 since I already am at 114. And you need java-gcj-compat-dev in Build-Depends instead of only java-gcj-compat since java-gcj-compat was split. #2. Error that libjawt doesn't exist. This is because it was renamed to libgcjawt in version gcc-4.0 4.0.0ds1-9ubuntu1, which is in the Debian version. Solution: [ snip ] I am not stupid. I know what causes this, especially since I added that patch myself at the time gcc still has libjawt. I even got doko to backport the change. And newer versions have a configure check for this. #3. Compile error: [ snip ] That's because you use 4.0. I know why I used 3.4 because binfilter didn't get patches to work with 4.0 at that time yet. This is NO FTBFS bug in the official package since you decided to build with a compiler known to not work with 1.9.108-1. ooo-build/build/src680-m108/binfilter/bf_forms/source/component/forms_Image.cxx, but no declaration of the class. You need forward declarations. Also already fixed. Regards, Rene signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tag 316951 + pending Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors Tags were: experimental Tags added: pending thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors
Rene == Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rene Please do TEST whether it is applicable to Debian. This is Rene the Debian BTS, not the Ubuntu one. i Rene If it doesn't fail in Debian it's not really a problem for Rene the Debian BTS (I do accept patches of course...). The source is from Debian... The gcc-4.0 I used is also from Debian. I added a disclaimer just in case it helped, maybe I shouldn't have mentioned Ubuntu? It seems to have been a distraction. I get the impression that the cause of problem #1 and #3 were due to my confusion in java-gcj-compat being split. I believe it was split in the Debian version of the package. I also believe that problem #2 was due to a change gcc-4.0, this is also applicable to Debian. Hence I would argue that the bugs are Debian specific, even when my work-arounds did not produce a working solution. However, if you continue to disagree, what do you think is the correct forum for getting assistance in such cases? Ubuntu would claim that their BTS is the wrong forum, as they would claim the source is from Debian, and they don't support it. Upstream would make similar claims, in fact the packaging issues have nothing to do with upstream. openoffice.org2 takes so long to compile (read: hours), I didn't really want to have to repeat the process on a Debian chroot. I thought it was better that I consult an expert - the Debian packager, and it would appear I was right - you already knew the answers. Rene It uses java-gcj-compats jni.h symlink. It should work on Rene Debian but I did not test it anymnore with m108 since I Rene already am at 114. And you need java-gcj-compat-dev in Rene Build-Depends instead of only java-gcj-compat since Rene java-gcj-compat was split. Ok, so it was meant to compile against gcc 3.4. This confused me because the build depends have a lot of references to packages built from gcc-4.0 source. If the symlink was in java-gcj-compats it didn't work, maybe the symlink was moved to java-gcj-compat-dev? #2. Error that libjawt doesn't exist. This is because it was renamed to libgcjawt in version gcc-4.0 4.0.0ds1-9ubuntu1, which is in the Debian version. Rene I am not stupid. I know what causes this, especially since I Rene added that patch myself at the time gcc still has libjawt. I Rene even got doko to backport the change. And newer versions Rene have a configure check for this. I thought if I added the solution here it could a) help you identify the cause of my problem. b) help others who encounter the same problem. c) eliminate wasting time by you needing to get clarifications I have since forgotten. I apologise if I insulted you in anyway by providing too much information. #3. Compile error: Rene [ snip ] Rene That's because you use 4.0. I know why I used 3.4 because Rene binfilter didn't get patches to work with 4.0 at that time Rene yet. This is NO FTBFS bug in the official package since you Rene decided to build with a compiler known to not work with Rene 1.9.108-1. ooo-build/build/src680-m108/binfilter/bf_forms/source/component/forms_Image.cxx, but no declaration of the class. Rene You need forward declarations. Also already fixed. I guess I need to decide now if it is more productive fixing m108, the latest version in experimental or waiting for a new version to be released. I get the impression that version 108 in Debian experimental is old and obsolete. Is there another place I should be looking to get the most up-to-date package? Thanks -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, #2. Error that libjawt doesn't exist. This is because it was renamed to libgcjawt in version gcc-4.0 4.0.0ds1-9ubuntu1, which is in the Debian version. Solution: [ snip ] I am not stupid. I know what causes this, especially since I added that patch myself at the time gcc still has libjawt. I even got doko to backport the change. And newer versions have a configure check for this. Not to mention that if you fixed 1. by using java-gcj-compat-dev then it would AFAIS have worked too since it contains a libjawt.so symlink... Gr??e/Regards, Ren? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCylXY+FmQsCSK63MRAsPfAKCAGWINdEPDj9saWVcMsMCvH0a2bQCfQUSJ dLVnaocRv3D33yHIbj0Z4po= =55Xp -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316951: openoffice.org2: compile errors
Hi, Am Dienstag, 5. Juli 2005 13:22 schrieb Brian May: I get the impression that the cause of problem #1 and #3 were due to my confusion in java-gcj-compat being split. I believe it was split in #3 not. #3 is just that you changed to a compiler which didn't yet work with the source. #1 is java-gcj-compat[-dev] problem and #2 is that patch. After a second look, although the newest java-gcj-compat contains a libjawt.so link it'd not help anyway since it doesn't look in i386/ for JDK == gcj. the Debian version of the package. I also believe that problem #2 was I don't know whether it also split in Ubuntu. I just use Debian. Rene It uses java-gcj-compats jni.h symlink. It should work on Rene Debian but I did not test it anymnore with m108 since I Rene already am at 114. And you need java-gcj-compat-dev in Rene Build-Depends instead of only java-gcj-compat since Rene java-gcj-compat was split. Ok, so it was meant to compile against gcc 3.4. This confused me Yes. because the build depends have a lot of references to packages built from gcc-4.0 source. yeah, gcj/gij 4.0 and libcj6. Because that's what can build OOs Java stuff. If the symlink was in java-gcj-compats it didn't work, maybe the symlink was moved to java-gcj-compat-dev? Yep. I apologise if I insulted you in anyway by providing too much information. Well, in this case it was really clear what the error is, so... I other cases you of course should give info, but in this trivial case... (at least for someone who did the offending patch himself as gcj had libjawt..) Rene You need forward declarations. Also already fixed. I guess I need to decide now if it is more productive fixing m108, the latest version in experimental or waiting for a new version to be released. I'd wait. Why do you want to rebuild it anyway? I get the impression that version 108 in Debian experimental is old and obsolete. Is there another place I should be looking to get the most up-to-date package? there's source for 1.9.110-0pre1 on p.d.o but I thik it will fail to build, too. I am currently working on 1.9.114 which needs some finetuning still I guess and then a i386 and powerpc (17 hrs!) build before I can upload it. 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
