Hi there,
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 18:01 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
> well that of course would be the case if the dependencies in the test
> makefile were complete. which they apparently are not. which is in no
> way obvious. which is my point.
Hah :-) so - one thing that I wondered about ... is - is it possible
that our gnumake dependencies on .component files do not include
dependencies to the libraries they are for ? such that we can build and
install the .component file - without having the library already
installed alongside it ? that would seem to be suggested by the need to
add this explicit dep on the hwp library in the .mk file - which can't
scale across modules. Do we need to have that added to
gb_Library_set_componentfile ? [1]
Another thing that interests me is whether there could be a race
between the workdir and solver instances of various things; presumably
we depend on the solver versions though.
Wrt. the non-uno pieces I took a look at the ucb/ucp d.lst and it
certainly installs the dll/.so stuff before the .component files in the
list - which look hopeful on that account (same for configmgr).
> > Seemingly tail_build depends on fpicker which depends on ucb - so the
> > ucb1, ucbfile1 components should be in-place.
>
> and i have already wasted half an hour looking at the libraries the darn
> thing loads and couldn't find anything obvious that was missing...
Right :-) I had a go too - nothing too obvious for the specific hwp
case; annoying really.
HTH,
Michael.
[1] - I'm just a gnumake newbie of course :-)
--
michael.me...@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
