[dev] oosrc680m125 Build error on suse 9.3
Dear all, I am using suse 9.3 professional version. The gpc general polygon clipper library 2.31 is being used with the mozilla source. I ran the following command 1)./configure --enable-build-mozilla in $SRC_ROOT/config_office 2)cd .. 3)tcsh 4)./bootstrap 5)source LinuxIntelEnv.set 6)rehash 7)dmake I am getting a build error as follows /opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zipapi - /opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage -- Making: ../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/ZipPackage.obj ccache g++ -Wuninitialized -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I../inc -I../../inc -I../../unx/inc -I../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I. -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solver/680/unxlngi4.pro/inc/stl -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solver/680/unxlngi4.pro/inc/external -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solver/680/unxlngi4.pro/inc -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solenv/unxlngi4/inc -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solenv/inc -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/res -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solver/680/unxlngi4.pro/inc/stl -I/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/solenv/inc/Xp31 -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-sun/include -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-sun/include/linux -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-sun/include/native_threads/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I. -I../../res -I. -O1 -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -include preinclude.h -fexceptions -fno-enforce-eh-specs -fpic -DLINUX -DUNX -DVCL -DGCC -DC300 -DINTEL -DGXX_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/include/c++/3.3.5 -DCVER=C300 -D_USE_NAMESPACE -DGLIBC=2 -DX86 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNEW_SOLAR -D_USE_NAMESPACE=1 -DSTLPORT_VERSION=400 -D__DMAKE -DUNIX -DCPPU_ENV=gcc3 -DSUPD=680 -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG -DPRODUCT_FULL -DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=0 -DOPTIMIZE -DEXCEPTIONS_ON -DCUI -DSOLAR_JAVA -DSRC680 -DSHAREDLIB -D_DLL_ -DMULTITHREAD -o ../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/ZipPackage.o /opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage/ZipPackage.cxx In file included from /opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage/ZipPackage.cxx:74: ../../inc/ZipPackageFolder.hxx: In member function `void ZipPackageFolder::setRemoveOnInsertMode_Impl(unsigned char)': ../../inc/ZipPackageFolder.hxx:124: error: invalid pointer to bit-field `ZipPackageEntry::mbAllowRemoveOnInsert' dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/ZipPackage.obj' '---* tg_merge.mk *---' ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making /opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage dmake: Error code 1, while making 'build_instsetoo_native' '---* tg_merge.mk *---' Can anyone tell me what is wrong here... Many Thanks Pema Geyleg +++ Get a free DrukNet e-mail account and stay in touch http://www.druknet.bt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Changing OOo strings in Windows Start menu
Hi list-members, I would like to change the strings of the Windows Start menu entries for OOo. In which file(s) are these strings located? Thanks, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] Warning-Free Code
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 09:58 +0200, Nikolai Pretzell wrote: Hi all, Ken Foskey wrote: So I would actually recommend against an all out warnings push unless everyone is VERY clear the objective is to highlight bugs not to remove warnings. The difference in objectives is very important. Yes, but given the mass of code we have, the only way I see to really highlight bugs, is to remove as much as all warnings. I consider myself a very experienced developer and to boot I have worked through a huge amount of warnings removal in several programs. I have been caught before between the subtle difference between warning removal and removing warnings for the purpose of highlighting bugs. Experience is not the issue, mundane means that even experienced programmers will hide the bug by correcting the warning. The goal of the task is to highlight bugs by removing obvious warnings then taking your time to eliminate the rest. Do this too fast and your fingers and quick solutions will take over. I speak from experience. Thanks Ken Foskey OpenOffice.org Programmer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo 2.0b2 Linux Distribution
Le Dimanche 4 Septembre 2005 16:56, Rob Ogilvie a écrit : Hello- I downloaded OOo 2.0 beta 2 (Linux x86 install) last night and was shocked to discover it is being distributed as a tarball full of RPMs. I wonder who made the decision to begin distributing OOo in RPM format and how we can go about getting that changed to something a bit more standard. I'm assuming OOo is as binary compatible in 2.0 beta 2 as it was in 1.0... if this isn't the case, then distribution makers are going to need to start building it themselves. If it *is* as binary compatible as it used to be, why would RPMs be chosen? And why would you tarball up a bunch of RPMs for distribution? There are a lot of folks out there who don't run RPM-based distributions, such as myself. :-) I don't know what is behind that choice, but: I suppose the debian folks have no problem to build a debian package starting from the source tree, which they can simply checkout through anonymous CVS, for example. They build it and then package the result, and they have both the source and the binary debian packages. I guess you can also run alien to install the latest beta RPM binaries on a debian-based system. Finally, I have seen that the build process uses a kind of meta-package builder. I suppose it could be adapted to generate .deb packages too. No? -- Marre des virus, vers, spywares, adwares et plantages ? Passez à Linux ! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo 2.0b2 Linux Distribution
Éric Bischoff wrote: I suppose the debian folks have no problem to build a debian package starting from the source tree, which they can simply checkout through anonymous CVS, for example. They build it and then package the result, and they have both the source and the binary debian packages. I guess you can also run alien to install the latest beta RPM binaries on a debian-based system. Finally, I have seen that the build process uses a kind of meta-package builder. I suppose it could be adapted to generate .deb packages too. No? I don't use (or particularly care for) Debian, either, though. :-) There are a bajillion distributions out there. If you plan on primarily distributing OOo in binary format, you can't decide to package it in a distribution-specific package management system. Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo 2.0b2 Linux Distribution
Le Dimanche 4 Septembre 2005 17:31, Rob Ogilvie a écrit : I don't use (or particularly care for) Debian, either, though. :-) Yes, I thought right after pressing Send button that I should have added the following text: Same goes for tgz-based distributions. Or any kind of distribution. There are a bajillion distributions out there. If you plan on primarily distributing OOo in binary format, you can't decide to package it in a distribution-specific package management system. I think the binary packages are a facility offered by the builders at Sun. Therefore you can't ask them too much. The real, final, packaging, should (and will) be done by each distribution packager, starting from the source files. And that's true for RPM-based distributions too. In addition to choosing the package format, it allows to fine-tune compilation options, to change file locations, menu entries, and configuration settings, to apply the additional patches they like, to change the pachage name, description and summary, etc. That's normal packager's work, and I guess they are all in the starting blocks for 2.0, and they don't really care about the RPM packages contributed by Sun other than like a template. I understand that package format on OOo web site is more of a problem for beta-testers. If you have time to offer, I suggest you propose to adapt the build system so that it can produce packages in your preferred format. Unless such a project already exists, and unless there is a reason why this would already have been discarded: I don't know. Best, -- Marre des virus, vers, spywares, adwares et plantages ? Passez à Linux ! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] oosrc680m125 Build error on suse 9.3
Dear Pavel,
../../inc/ZipPackageFolder.hxx:124: error: invalid
pointer
to bit-field
ZipPackageEntry::mbAllowRemoveOnInsert'
Looking at the issue at
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=51940
I changed
void setRemoveOnInsertMode_Impl( sal_Bool bRemove ) {
ZipPackageEntry::mbAllowRemoveOnInsert = bRemove; }
to
void setRemoveOnInsertMode_Impl( sal_Bool bRemove ) {
this-mbAllowRemoveOnInsert = bRemove; }
Now I am getting this error...
/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage/ZipPackageFolder.cxx:
In constructor `ZipPackageFolder::ZipPackageFolder(const
com::sun::star::uno::Referencecom::sun::star::lang::XMultiServiceFactory,
unsigned char, unsigned char)':
/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage/ZipPackageFolder.cxx:131:
error: invalid pointer to bit-field
`ZipPackageEntry::mbAllowRemoveOnInsert'
dmake: Error code 1, while making
'../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/ZipPackageFolder.obj'
'---* tg_merge.mk *---'
ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making
/opt/openoffice/build/ooo_SRC680_m125_src/package/source/zippackage
dmake: Error code 1, while making
'build_instsetoo_native'
'---* tg_merge.mk *---'
Could u tell me y?
Many Thanks
Pema Geyleg
+++
Get a free DrukNet e-mail account and stay in touch
http://www.druknet.bt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Error in Building OOo_1.1.4
HI I am Jinu Prakash. I am trying to build OO english. I followed the steps specified in the openoffice.org website and till creation of dmake it worked well(i am building windows version. Now while running dmake i came across the below mentioned errors. Can anyone help me. [E:\openoffice\source\OOo_1.1.4_source.tar]dmake build -- version: 1.86.18.2 Checking dmake... = Building project x11_extensions = deliver -- version: 1.50.8.8 Statistics: Files copied: 0 Files unchanged/not matching: 4 = Building project helpcontent = E:\openoffice\source\OOo_1.1.4_source.tar\helpco # # # ERROR: minor.mk in solenv\inc does not match # # dmake: E:\openoffice\source\OOo_1.1.4_source.ta 137: Error -- force_dmake_to_error: No such fil ---*SETTINGS.MK*--- ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making E:\open ar\helpcontent\wnt\simpress dmake: Error code 129, while making 'build_all' Jinu
