Compiling Open Office 2.0.rc-2, missing diff fix

didymos

Has anyone else run into these errors building OO2 on amd64:

cynric · Guru Joined: 08 Oct 2004 Posts: 439

Just to check the basics, have you re-sync'ed afterwards? I find that most of the time that will fix missing patches.

In case you aren't famaliar with the routine, sync'ing (emerge sync) grabs a new snapshot of the portage tree; thus potentially fixing broken links and missing files.

didymos · Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:30 pm Post subject:

Yeah, I tried a resync, but nothing changed. The thing is, the patch apply list is buried way down in portage's /var/tmp hierarchy, and it is something created by the OO team, not the Gentoo developers. As I said, the OO office team has killed those patches on CVS. They're part of the upstream source (or rather were part of the upstream source), not part of the /usr/portage/ tree. I suppose I could resync another time, but I can pretty much guarantee it won't do a thing.

Thomas S. Howard

didymos · Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:37 pm Post subject:

Yeah, that didn't help.

Thomas S. Howard

cynric · Guru Joined: 08 Oct 2004 Posts: 439

Yeah, I didn't think it would (or at least you'd probably already checked) since you went so far as to dig in CVS. But, you never know. Hopefully someone will shed some light on it; good luck.

steve_d555 · Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:55 pm Post subject:

Building OO2? What could possess a person to do such a thing

I think that the -bin version is probably the best way to go as the source code is always changing and you don't want to have to recompile everytime a fix comes out. RC2 is hardmasked but you can just put =app-office/openoffice-bin-2.0.0_rc2 in package.unmask and emerge.

If you really do need to, you can pause the compilation right before that (with Ctrl-Z) then copy then patch into one of those dirs then restart (fg).
_________________
rubyforums | blog | boxwhore

didymos · Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:59 pm Post subject:

Yeah, that's how I got it on my system in the first place. Otherwise, I wouldn't be having ebuild problems. As to why:

1. See if it works
2. If 1 fails, find out why
3. Find and fix bugs

Thomas S. Howard

taskara · Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:33 am Post subject:

I'm also having this problem.

didymos · Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:11 am Post subject:

Yeah, unfortunately, even when you fix that, the build is still going to flake out on a bunch of other stuff. Most of it has been problems with build options. For example, OO wanted to build it's own copy of berkeley db, and was screwing it up. Once it was told to knock it off and use the system libraries, it was fine, until it tried to something else equally stupid and redundant. The other thing that was a big problem was mozilla. By default, OO tries to use system mozilla libraries, even when you don't have them, and it can't cope with the firefox equivalents even though there is a "--with-firefox" build option. Since I didn't wan't to install the old mozilla suite, I finally grabbed the moz source and stuck it in a directory OO sets aside for that purpose, then told the build to compile the libraries itself. Which it did. Then it died building the java stuff. I fixed one bug where it insisted on turning a 64-bit integer into a 32-bit integer, despite the fact that it was checking to see if it should do that. After that, it finished building the java components, but when it tried to set them up, it decided at the last second that it couldn't deal with the JRE because it was "unrecognized", despite being the blackdown version (64-bit and everything), which is listed in the vendors file it checks for JRE compatibility. I haven't been able to get it past that, but I ran across something on the OO site that said 64-bit OO needs 1.5, even though the 32-bit OO can't handle it. So, I'll try that at some point. I'm not really expecting too much; I'm more curious as to why it's not working than anything else.

Thomas S. Howard

taskara · Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:53 am Post subject:

Hmmm interesting.
I wonder if building a binary using that ebuild on a 32bit machine

taskara · Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 12:09 am Post subject:

The openoffice-2.0 ebuild fails with the same thing

taskara · Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:45 am Post subject:

OK, I've been trying to get the AMD64 version to compile. Like didymos, it now fails on BerkleyDB.

Firstly, you need mozilla, openldap and gnome-vfs libraries, so compile these first

drawsmcgraw · Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:52 pm Post subject:

Same exact problem here

stupid math files! And the files taskara mentions touching aren't even there when I try!? But then, I'm using this: