Hi Juergen
Thank you for your help and suggestion.
The product we are to develop will use C++ for developing language. It's purely
new, also we lack experiences for cross-platform. So we prefer to use AWT.
What we are consider is whether AWT is allowed to use in a commercial software.
Can you giv
LiZhan(李湛) wrote:
Hi everyone, we are planning to develop several new commercial products for our
company, and we need a cross-platform GUI lib used as their base GUI module.
So can we use AWT(certainly with GSL and VCL) of OpenOffice.org in our program?
well you can use it but i don't think th
Hi everyone, we are planning to develop several new commercial products for our
company, and we need a cross-platform GUI lib used as their base GUI module.
So can we use AWT(certainly with GSL and VCL) of OpenOffice.org in our program?
Does every module in OpenOffice.org follow the LGPL?
Hope
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 20:19 +0100, Caolan McNamara wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:02 -0400, Terrence Enger wrote:
> > Greetings.
> >
> > I am trying to build BEA300_m2 on Ubuntu 8.04 (hardy). Creation
> > of libhyphenli.so fails with messages ...
> >
> > ../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/hyphe
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:02 -0400, Terrence Enger wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I am trying to build BEA300_m2 on Ubuntu 8.04 (hardy). Creation
> of libhyphenli.so fails with messages ...
>
> ../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/hyphenimp.o: In function
> `Hyphenator::getLocales()':
>
>
> /home/terr
Greetings.
I am trying to build BEA300_m2 on Ubuntu 8.04 (hardy). Creation
of libhyphenli.so fails with messages ...
../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/hyphenimp.o: In function
`Hyphenator::getLocales()':
/home/terry/OOo_hacking/BEA300_m2/lingucomponent/source/hyphenator/altlinuxhyph/hyphen/
Ariel,
Thanks for your help. This got me past this roadblock. Now dmake's
module list check passes.
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
Hi,
DrHatch escribió:
Hello,
Newcomer here; trying to build BEA300_m2 (with debug on).
This is a first-time build.
Using a 32-bit Ubuntu 8.04 installation on an A
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Juergen Schmidt writes:
Hi Juergen,
Try simply
UNO_TYPES=file:.../ure/share/misc/types.rdb
file:///.../basis3.0/program/offapi.rdb
UNO_SERVICES=file:.../ure/share/misc/services.rdb
file:///.../basis3.0/program/services.rdb
Ah, I almost had something like th
Juergen Schmidt writes:
Hi Juergen,
> Try simply
> UNO_TYPES=file:.../ure/share/misc/types.rdb
> file:///.../basis3.0/program/offapi.rdb
> UNO_SERVICES=file:.../ure/share/misc/services.rdb
> file:///.../basis3.0/program/services.rdb
Ah, I almost had something like that... This helps an
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Juergen Schmidt writes:
Hi Juergen,
that's not enough, you need the offapi.rdb and the service.rdb from the
basis layer as well. It should be fine to put an rc
(.ini) besides your test application and specify which
rdb's should be used. See for example the fundamenta
Juergen Schmidt writes:
Hi Juergen,
> that's not enough, you need the offapi.rdb and the service.rdb from the
> basis layer as well. It should be fine to put an rc
> (.ini) besides your test application and specify which
> rdb's should be used. See for example the fundamentalrc
Ok, makes sens
Jurgis,
multiple signatures already work, all are contained in the same
documentsignature.xml.
We already have on our list to offer fields for displaying signature
information, but IMHO no concrete plans to start such an implementation
because we also have many many other things to do.
Signing p
Hello,
we are looking for such digital signature functionality for odf:
* ability for several persons to sign the same document
(the signatures can be hierarchically contained or independant)
now I see documentsignature.xml, which is replaced when signing again..
* ability to sign parts of docume
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Juergen Schmidt writes:
i don't think so. I would take a look on the new office structure. The
main changes are two type libraries and two service rdb's, one in the
office base layer and one in the URE.
Yes, I did not notice that; I figured they were renamed. Previo
Hi Tobias,
Tobias Krais wrote:
Hi together,
we just upgraded from OOo 1.1.4 to OOo 2.4. Our documents are all sxw
documents. Some customers claim, that the formatting is now different
My question: does OOo illustrate / display sxw files as OOo 1.1.x does?
Or are there differences?
If there are
Juergen Schmidt writes:
> i don't think so. I would take a look on the new office structure. The
> main changes are two type libraries and two service rdb's, one in the
> office base layer and one in the URE.
Yes, I did not notice that; I figured they were renamed. Previously,
services.rdb and
Frank Schönheit writes:
> The CWS sb83 was created on SRC680, so the CVS tag is "cws_src680_sb83",
> since it is nailed down at creation time of the CWS, and never changed.
Ah, makes sense. Thanks!
> Stephan is on vacation ATM, but I seem to remember he recently fixed a
> number of issues relat
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 07:00:03PM +0200, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Maybe you can provide some more details about the layout engine
test tool. How do you use it and in which context or environment.
Hi Jürgen,
the relevant stuff resides in toolkit/workben/lay
18 matches
Mail list logo
