[CC:ing debain-openoffice, may be interessant for others, too ] Hi,
Alex Perry wrote: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2004/07/msg00216.html > http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2004/07/msg00227.html > > This exchange was six months ago, and I can't find anything more recent > using Google. Is there any status information about Debian pyuno around? > > The two mentioned bug entries haven't changed in ten months either ... > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=220226 > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=232905 > > There is mention of bringing up UNO for people using Bibus on Debian > http://bibus-biblio.sourceforge.net/LinuxInstall.html > so it's not clear to me whether we couldn't just package what they did. > It seems to unpack and run reasonably well on Testing (i.e. OOo 1.1). Right. The lack of a python-pyuno package is excatly the reason mentioned in that bibus article below. (look for the ucs2 stuff=. It'd build with python2.2 and python2.3 but will not work with 2.3. And as I tried to make policy-compliant package for python-pyuno I failed (puttting all stuff in /usr/lib/openoffice/program is bad.) OOo2 updates to python2.3 which gives us a bit hope that it may work there (especially since they AFAIS don't use "special" configure options to the included python...) Grüße/Regards, René -- .''`. 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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature