On 22/07/12 16:36, Lubos Lunak wrote: > There was one more thing broken. The recent changes to get dev-install > working changed the package format built in the 'build' target to .zip, so > there was no .msi package to upload. I've reverted that change and moved the > FORCE2ARCHIVE part to dev-install,
oh i didn't notice that FORCE2ARCHIVE would prevent MSI from being built, but looking at the actual instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk it overrides PKGFORMAT, so it's not a surprise :) if we want to build a MSI anyway, then building the archive in dev-install makes a lot of sense. > but this whole 'build' target looks broken > to me. What's the point of building a .msi archive there? Especially now with > dev-install that looks completely pointless and it should have its own > target. "build" should build the install set(s) that the user has told configure to build with the --with-package-format option. apparently that defaults to nothing for Linux and to MSI for WNT. for building everything except instset there is already a build-packimages target. > Does somebody understand this perl install cruft? i, for one, certainly don't. which is why i've implemented dev-install with FORCE2ARCHIVE, after finding that modifying ooinstall to call the installer with --format=installed didn't yield success. On 23/07/12 11:30, Lubos Lunak wrote: > On Sunday 22 of July 2012, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> I added the push of LibO*.zip files in push_nightlies.sh. > > Is there any point in uploading a .zip file with a Windows build? that's a good question, it depends on what you want to test; for testing office functionality it's probably easier to use zips because they're trivial to install (just unzip) and use a private profile directory automatically, but they don't have bundled MSVC runtimes or system integration so you can't test that _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
