there)
Does anybody know why? IMHO it should be empty or unset.
I don't think that it makes sense to check WITH_LANG in makefiles for
being empty or a space. For the time being I will do it to get the CWS
approved. But IMHO we should fix the build bots.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Math
On 06/24/2010 02:27 PM, Davide Dozza wrote:
Davide Dozza ha scritto:
Mathias Bauer ha scritto:
[...]
That indicates that your frmmi.dll is either not there or misses some
prerequisites. You can find out more using the dependency walker tool
that you can download from the Internet (http
mmi.dll".
"$(depends)" is the path to your depends.exe. You should see which dll
is missing or where symbols in a dll are missing.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please d
On 22.06.2010 14:49, Bernd Eilers wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
the "right solution" would be to remove the check. A target milestone
is a hint when a particular should be fixed or is planned to be fixed.
The same is true for a CWS. If a developers decided to fix an issue
Hi Davide,
On 19.06.2010 13:43, Davide Dozza wrote:
I'm still trzing to compile DEV300_m82 on WinXP and now I've found this
problem:
Entering /cygdrive/c/DEV300_82/instsetoo_native/util
dmake: makefile.mk: line 211: Warning: -- Prior to dmake 4.5 only one
%-target per target-definition work
ee the color red is IMHO not the
right solution. On the contrary I would argue that maybe even setting
the CWS to "ready for QA" shouldn´t be allowed at all if there are tasks
with the wrong target.
Kind regards,
Bernd Eilers
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Hi,
ACK.
If we think that we nee
EIS2/cws.ShowCWS?Id=9434&OpenOnly=false&Section=All>).
-Stephan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tools.openoffice.org
--
Mathias Baue
thias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "nospamfor...@gmx.de".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read ot
;msgNo=350
>
> Ciao
> Frank
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tools.openoffice.org
>
Thanks!
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead
on is that executing the smoke test is broken on that
machine in general. Can someone confirm this? And if that is true, can
we disable the smoke test on that machine until it is fixed?
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun:
hint and answered it with a
blackmailing attempt. Not something that lets you look good in the public.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "nospamfor...@gmx
Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> I just wanted to point out that you seem to underestimate the value
>> of a less diverse build system. Most probably because you don't
>> have to maintain it. ;-)
>>
> Quite the contrary. I have to p
d to avoid. I just wanted to point out that you seem
to underestimate the value of a less diverse build system. Most probably
because you don't have to maintain it. ;-)
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 02/03/10 15:38, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> I tend to agree that - whatever we will do - we probably won't get rid
>> of cygwin. Where we have to get rid of it is the building of the
>> "normal" modules.
>>
>> As an exam
Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Jussi Pakkanen wrote:
>
>> Another point is "However, there are many cases where the current
>> build process depends on a large set of external tools like bash, awk,
>> findutils, coreutils." Does the actual building require these or is i
(well, without the external
ones). Being able to do that in Visual Studio would be a tremendeous
achievement. But using Visual Studio as a "launcher" for cygwin shells
is probably not what we want here. So the build of "normal" C++
libraries should run inside VS completely.
Building
tly leave
the simple path of "just some c++/Java/src/idl compiling and that's it".
I think we should investigate their current makefiles and see how they
translate into systems using one of the possible candidates. Tomorrow I
will add this list to the wiki page Björn has started.
it. Whether it's the number one or the
number two priority doesn't matter for me: IMHO it's a must have
priority. As always, YMMV.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineerin
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 01/27/10 09:07, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> Jussi Pakkanen wrote:
>>> Yes, sure. If and only if you have target_link_libraries(some_exe
>>> some_library) then the linker invocation for some_exe will have
>>> '-lsome_library&#
build runs in several processes, even if they are
>> called recursively.
>
> Again I don't know about the implementation. But when I run 'make -j
> 17' on a 16 core machine and then run top, I get 100% CPU utilization
> almost all of the time. So it definitely &quo
si Pakkanen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>
>> So, how can we implement "include, not execute" with CMake?
>
> You can do this, if it is absolutely necessary. I'll describe that at
> the end of the message.
>
>> Cons
uild
stability improvements that the GNU Make approach can give us. In case
we can have a "super makefile" that *executes* the others (recursive
approach) we have at least an improvement because this file will be the
replacement for all build.lst files. But still the only way to find
missing
rations
instead of more or less complex expressions are indeed valuable. Let's
see what we can do in the way Björn suggested.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply t
gt; both.
I don't think that we must keep the bad habit of having source files of
different libs in one directory. We can easily fix that on demand, so
this shouldn't be a roadblock for anything.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org
process without clashing of target names.
So the only way to reuse CMake makefiles for a complete build is
recursively calling them or - as we do today in OOo - serialize the
process. I don't think that this is a matter of performance per se, it's
just that the benefit is missing we wan
Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> So if you could explain how bjam (or any other make system that
>> someone wants to suggest here) solves our problems or why the
>> problems that require bjam to be resolved are even bigger than
>> those we try to f
Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> most of the points you've raised I already replied to in my followup
> to Bjoern (including my ideal msword lib makefile) -
>
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> build.pl uses module dependencies, not target dependencies, so it has
ity tests Björn has done for GNU make made us think that
this won't be our problem. Most of our dependencies are header
dependencies. The additional dependencies on other prerequisites are
important (and - as I wrote - are the PITA in our current system) but
not so numerous. So what we have se
s to provide his work, the better will be the result. But I
agree with Jörg, this will take time and if smaller improvements can be
done before, we should be glad to get them.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.
Jörg Jahnke wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> Mathias Bauer schrieb:
> ...
>>
>> Currently the way how localizations get into OOo is very inefficient. At
>> some point in time a "deadline" is reached and a whole bunch of
>> localizable content is
nly using configure or not that makes a
difference in the resulting builds, of course the "base line" and the
(system) libraries linked against are important also. I assume that you
know that, so this is just for completeness in case someone not knowing
that is reading our discussion.
Helge Delfs - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/23/09 08:29, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> Really, this part of the work is superfluous. IMHO tests that are known
>> to be broken in a particular milestone should be skipped in a CWS based
>> on it also.
he waste in time would be
smaller then (a broken test doesn't take a lot of time, the waste comes
from manually checking the results as we have to do now). But I take
every bet that everybody would do the same with the "sensible
information" that the master has the same failur
ld be justified.
What do you think? Of course I don't want to impose something on others,
but perhaps many people would like to work in such a faster and more
flexible way, even if it needed some work on the build environment and
some change in working style of the l10n teams. Maybe nobody da
make sure that building in
instsetoo_native will give a hint what needs to be done, very much in
the same way as configure does it in most cases.
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don'
to tags?
It isn't hard, but it seems that those who had to do it refuse to do so.
> PLEASE fix it.
+1
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "nospamfor.
Hi Malte,
Malte Timmermann wrote:
> PS: Not sure, but I think [EMAIL PROTECTED] might be the better
> places for this..
Are you sure that there is still someone listening on that list? ;-)
Perhaps [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] is better.
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Baue
ure to build with ATL :)
>
> Thanks, and best regards,
>
> Dooteo
>
> Jatorrizko mezua: az., 2008-11-05 16:04 +0100, egilea: Mathias Bauer
>> Hi,
>>
>> to get rid of the atl header problem on the ooo300 code line you have to
>> manually set the environment
teo
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
Stefan Taxhet wrote:
> [cc'ed [EMAIL PROTECTED]; please follow-up there...]
>
> Hi,
>
> Nils Fuhrmann wrote:
>> * server preparation:
>> - migrate available keys from CN nach svn.services.openoffice.org:
>>open, needs discussion with Stefan
>
> Heiner contacted me with this idea. My propos
Hi Michael,
Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 10:55 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> >I would really like to kill the meme that quality can only be achieved
>> > by making fewer code changes, and by making developers' lives
>> > unreasonably diff
pdf
:-)
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarel
Hi Eric,
Eric Hoch wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
> Am Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:48:47 +0200 schrieb Mathias Bauer:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Maho NAKATA wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> How I can checkout DEV300 branch (OOo3) source code correctly?
>>>
>>> Acco
that I could give you, but for checking out a milestone it is fine.
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to &qu
ies? Or could you, please?
As long as the lists are project oriented and not module oriented we
won't succeed. As alway, IMHO. :-)
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/Gu
er results. Additionally the (small) performance penalty only occurs
> once when a DLL is loaded.
So in short words: whether we can use that depends on how much it badly
influences startup performance.
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering
candidates
are carried out. See
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/ESC_minutes#Face2Face_meeting_in_Hamburg_2007-10-29.2F30
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to
Oliver Braun wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> Oliver Braun wrote:
>>> What are the reasons (again) why shared libraries and dlls aren't directly
>>> created in solver instead of the modules local output tree ?
>>
>> I assume mainly the fact that Hamb
dules local output tree ?
I assume mainly the fact that Hamburg developers don't have write access
to solver when building non-locally. ;-)
Besides I think it's just because nobody asked for it and now it's quite
some work to change the build system in a way that "deliver" is
ion
> An extension, first has his own life outside OOo
> When popular and included in OOo by default, sources come into the CVS
> and is built during the whole process
The point is that people want to get rid of the "whole process". That
doesn't mean that we won't be abl
Hi Kendy,
Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> On Friday 12 October 2007 20:18, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>
>> > just stumbled about that the report design extension is built during the
>> > regular build process, wouldn't it be better at all to create a sour
ns of them at times. In case that isn't
possible individual "oo3rdparty" packages for each single 3rd party
library might come in handy.
Are there any other advantages or disadvantages of either concept that I
forgot to mention here?
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Le
papi removed, it's not used any
> more).
Yes, I already planned to have a look. I wish the day had more than 24
hours ...
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarel
d modularization in the sources we should IHMO also do the right
> packaging of sources,
+1!
What already is separated shouldn't become munged with the rest. We know
how fast the separation can get lost. :-)
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffi
de base will be the limiting factor.
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
I use it for the OOo lists
rse I take it for granted that those suggesting
the change will help doing it. ;-)
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTE
Eike Rathke wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> On Thursday, 2007-07-05 11:55:49 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>
>> I've set $CXX and $CCACHE_DIR as described and copied the ccache.exe I
>> downloaded from your site into $CCACHE_DIR.
>>
>> On VC2003 I got
>>
Express.
I've set $CXX and $CCACHE_DIR as described and copied the ccache.exe I
downloaded from your site into $CCACHE_DIR.
On VC2003 I got
"Execvp error. Aborting.: No such file or directory"
and on VC2005 it was something pointing out that the compiler couldn't
be detec
59 matches
Mail list logo
