Re: gstreamer status for 4.2.0-dev?
So have we come up w/ an agreed upon decision? Are we baselining gstreamer-1.0, and our community/build-systems will be based on CentOS6 (ie: dropping "official" support for CentOS5)? If so, I can start on some 4.2.0-dev r1834788 Linux builds... (I'm already trying macOS builds but having some weird build issues w/ main/store) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
main/store exported symbol issues
It looks like I'm having some weird build issues with
this module due to exported symbols not working out
(on macOS... haven't tried Linux yet). Any ideas??
The error is:
[ build CHK ] loaded modules: store
[ build PKG ] store_xml
mkdir -p
/Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/Package/ &&
touch
/Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/Package/store_xml
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
"UDK_3_0_0 {", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"global:", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"local:", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_acquireHandle;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_attrib;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_closeDirectory;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_closeFile;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_closeStream;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_createMemoryFile;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_findFirst;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_findNext;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_flushFile;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_flushStream;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_getFileRefererCount;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_getFileSize;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_getStreamSize;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_link;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_openDirectory;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_openFile;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_openStream;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_readStream;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_rebuildFile;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_releaseHandle;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_remove;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_rename;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_setStreamSize;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_symlink;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"store_writeStream;", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
"};", referenced from:
-exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
make: *** [/Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv/gbuild/LinkTarget.mk:251:
/Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/LinkTarget/Library/libstore.dylib]
Error 1
dmake: Error code 2, while making 'all'
1 module(s):
store
need(s) to be rebuilt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
main/store exported symbol issues
Hi Jim,
"Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:"
This might have something to do with Damjans changes for a Windows
64-bit build.
The buildbots for Windows and Linux are doing fine, so it seems to be
macOS only.
Regards,
Matthias
Am 03.07.2018 um 13:26 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> It looks like I'm having some weird build issues with
> this module due to exported symbols not working out
> (on macOS... haven't tried Linux yet). Any ideas??
>
> The error is:
>
> [ build CHK ] loaded modules: store
> [ build PKG ] store_xml
> mkdir -p
> /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/Package/ &&
> touch
> /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/Package/store_xml
> Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
> "UDK_3_0_0 {", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "global:", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "local:", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_acquireHandle;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_attrib;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_closeDirectory;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_closeFile;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_closeStream;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_createMemoryFile;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_findFirst;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_findNext;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_flushFile;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_flushStream;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_getFileRefererCount;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_getFileSize;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_getStreamSize;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_link;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_openDirectory;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_openFile;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_openStream;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_readStream;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_rebuildFile;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_releaseHandle;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_remove;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_rename;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_setStreamSize;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_symlink;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "store_writeStream;", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> "};", referenced from:
> -exported_symbol[s_list] command line option
> ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
> clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see
> invocation)
> make: *** [/Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solenv/gbuild/LinkTarget.mk:251:
> /Users/jim/src/asf/AOO420/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/workdir/LinkTarget/Library/libstore.dylib]
> Error 1
> dmake: Error code 2, while making 'all'
>
> 1 module(s):
> store
> need(s) to be rebuilt
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: main/store exported symbol issues
> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:47 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > "Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:" > > This might have something to do with Damjans changes for a Windows 64-bit > build. > > The buildbots for Windows and Linux are doing fine, so it seems to be macOS > only. > > Regards, > >Matthias > Thanks... anyone recall offhand what those changes were, svn rev #s, etc...?
Re: gstreamer status for 4.2.0-dev?
Oops. Forget that. Even CentOS6 doesn't support gstreamer-1.0. > On Jul 3, 2018, at 6:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > So have we come up w/ an agreed upon decision? Are we baselining > gstreamer-1.0, and our community/build-systems will be based on > CentOS6 (ie: dropping "official" support for CentOS5)? > > If so, I can start on some 4.2.0-dev r1834788 Linux builds... > > (I'm already trying macOS builds but having some weird build > issues w/ main/store) > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: main/store exported symbol issues
Am 03.07.2018 um 13:59 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > >> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:47 AM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> "Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:" >> >> This might have something to do with Damjans changes for a Windows 64-bit >> build. >> >> The buildbots for Windows and Linux are doing fine, so it seems to be macOS >> only. >> >> Regards, >> >>Matthias >> > Thanks... anyone recall offhand what those changes were, svn rev #s, etc...? Of course Damjan knows best! ;-) But this might fit: https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1827620 Regards, Matthias > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: gstreamer status for 4.2.0-dev?
I think there was no big support for supporting gstreamer 0.1.0 on 4.2. branch. If those who need it , they should help. Also I think it makes more sense in such a case to keep maintenance for 4.1.x branch. That means we will have to move to centOS7 for building. On 03.07.2018 14:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: Oops. Forget that. Even CentOS6 doesn't support gstreamer-1.0. On Jul 3, 2018, at 6:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: So have we come up w/ an agreed upon decision? Are we baselining gstreamer-1.0, and our community/build-systems will be based on CentOS6 (ie: dropping "official" support for CentOS5)? If so, I can start on some 4.2.0-dev r1834788 Linux builds... (I'm already trying macOS builds but having some weird build issues w/ main/store) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: gstreamer status for 4.2.0-dev?
+1. I'll start on a CentOS7 VM. BTW, up to now I've been using VMware Fusion, but will likely start using Vbox instead... I'm assuming most people are using that anyway and it would be nice to be able to share the VMs with others. > On Jul 3, 2018, at 8:30 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > I think there was no big support for supporting gstreamer 0.1.0 on 4.2. > branch. If those who need it , they should help. > Also I think it makes more sense in such a case to keep maintenance for 4.1.x > branch. > > That means we will have to move to centOS7 for building. > > > > On 03.07.2018 14:00, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Oops. Forget that. Even CentOS6 doesn't support gstreamer-1.0. >> >> >>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 6:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> So have we come up w/ an agreed upon decision? Are we baselining >>> gstreamer-1.0, and our community/build-systems will be based on >>> CentOS6 (ie: dropping "official" support for CentOS5)? >>> >>> If so, I can start on some 4.2.0-dev r1834788 Linux builds... >>> >>> (I'm already trying macOS builds but having some weird build >>> issues w/ main/store) >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Hi Peter, Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > Hi everbody. > > > I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we > manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some > stuff to get out to the people. > > Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. > Containing some security fixes, plus > > > - Java 8 Update 172 > - Apache Ant 1.10.3 > - Mozilla Build 3.2 > - NSIS 3.03 > - some minor fixes > > I think Matthias patch set is a nice small and good bundle, to > release. I would only like to add a patch from Bugzilla which adds SSL > capabilities to merge mail. (Has been a topic recently) > > I suggest we create and merge all patches collected together into > 4.1.6 branch. > > Is there support for bringing this out and test it? :) Obviously a +1 from me! ;-) But apart from preparing the code we must not forget these two issues: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127530 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127789 Regards, Matthias > > > All the best > > Peter > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs: I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out to the people. Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. Containing some security fixes, plus - Java 8 Update 172 - Apache Ant 1.10.3 - Mozilla Build 3.2 - NSIS 3.03 - some minor fixes I think Matthias patch set is a nice small and good bundle, to release. I would only like to add a patch from Bugzilla which adds SSL capabilities to merge mail. (Has been a topic recently) I suggest we create and merge all patches collected together into 4.1.6 branch. Is there support for bringing this out and test it? :) +1 I can test builds on Linux 64-bit. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
As soon as we have a repo branch setup, I'll kick off Linux and macOS builds. > On Jul 3, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage >> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out >> to the people. >> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. >> Containing some security fixes, plus >> - Java 8 Update 172 >> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >> - Mozilla Build 3.2 >> - NSIS 3.03 >> - some minor fixes >> I think Matthias patch set is a nice small and good bundle, to release. I >> would only like to add a patch from Bugzilla which adds SSL capabilities to >> merge mail. (Has been a topic recently) >> I suggest we create and merge all patches collected together into 4.1.6 >> branch. >> Is there support for bringing this out and test it? :) > > +1 > > I can test builds on Linux 64-bit. > > Marcus > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Am 03.07.2018 um 19:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > As soon as we have a repo branch setup, I'll kick off Linux and macOS builds. I'll do the Windows builds... ;-) > >> On Jul 3, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Marcus wrote: >> >> Am 01.07.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage >>> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get >>> out to the people. >>> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. >>> Containing some security fixes, plus >>> - Java 8 Update 172 >>> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >>> - Mozilla Build 3.2 >>> - NSIS 3.03 >>> - some minor fixes >>> I think Matthias patch set is a nice small and good bundle, to release. I >>> would only like to add a patch from Bugzilla which adds SSL capabilities to >>> merge mail. (Has been a topic recently) >>> I suggest we create and merge all patches collected together into 4.1.6 >>> branch. >>> Is there support for bringing this out and test it? :) >> +1 >> >> I can test builds on Linux 64-bit. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Hi Kay, Am 01.07.2018 um 23:51 schrieb Kay Schenk: > Hi *, > > If 4.1.6 would contain some needed security fixes, by all means, it > needs to be released as soon as possible. > > Some questions -- > > Will Java 8 then be the minimum version to use 4.1.6? > Because Ant is only used for building, this should not affect any > end-user requirements, right? Java 8 will only be used for building. The end user should be able to use Java 7 or Java 8. Not sure about Java 6, but that has been EOL for a long time. (Speaking for Windows, I don't know how the other platforms will be built) > Would 4.1.6 still be using gstreamer 0.10? Yes. > > > > On 07/01/2018 08:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >> Hi everbody. >> >> >> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we >> manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some >> stuff to get out to the people. >> >> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. >> Containing some security fixes, plus >> >> >> - Java 8 Update 172 >> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >> - Mozilla Build 3.2 >> - NSIS 3.03 >> - some minor fixes >> >> I think Matthias patch set is a nice small and good bundle, to >> release. I would only like to add a patch from Bugzilla which adds SSL >> capabilities to merge mail. (Has been a topic recently) >> >> I suggest we create and merge all patches collected together into >> 4.1.6 branch. >> >> Is there support for bringing this out and test it? :) >> >> >> All the best >> >> Peter >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > Hi everbody. > > > I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage > to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out > to the people. > > Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. Containing > some security fixes, plus > > > - Java 8 Update 172 > - Apache Ant 1.10.3 What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for 1.10.x? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > >> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >> >> Hi everbody. >> >> >> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage >> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out >> to the people. >> >> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. >> Containing some security fixes, plus >> >> >> - Java 8 Update 172 >> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 > What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for 1.10.x? What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we build with Java 8 we can use it... ;-) My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept what can be done with AOO 4.1.x. But of course we can build with 1.9.x if that is wanted? Regards, Matthias > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: main/store exported symbol issues
Looking over it again, it looks like the build is trying to do something wonky with the store.map file... > On Jul 3, 2018, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 03.07.2018 um 13:59 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> >>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:47 AM, Matthias Seidel >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jim, >>> >>> "Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:" >>> >>> This might have something to do with Damjans changes for a Windows 64-bit >>> build. >>> >>> The buildbots for Windows and Linux are doing fine, so it seems to be macOS >>> only. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >> Thanks... anyone recall offhand what those changes were, svn rev #s, etc...? > > Of course Damjan knows best! ;-) > > But this might fit: > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1827620 > > Regards, >Matthias > >> >> > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: main/store exported symbol issues
I think this may have to do w/ the 'Implement the ability to build "UDK versioned" libraries in gbuild' stuff from http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1827456 This is breaking macOS horribly! > On Jul 3, 2018, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 03.07.2018 um 13:59 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> >>> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:47 AM, Matthias Seidel >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jim, >>> >>> "Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:" >>> >>> This might have something to do with Damjans changes for a Windows 64-bit >>> build. >>> >>> The buildbots for Windows and Linux are doing fine, so it seems to be macOS >>> only. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >> Thanks... anyone recall offhand what those changes were, svn rev #s, etc...? > > Of course Damjan knows best! ;-) > > But this might fit: > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1827620 > > Regards, >Matthias > >> >> > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was no longer supported plus had some sort of security related issue making it unsuited for AOO... ie, we *needed* to use Ant 1.10 not just that we now *can* use it. How about showing some sympathy and understanding for those who may be stuck w/ older machines? After all, let's be real, our continued support for "older" systems is the only real thing we have going for us... It's these little things that make significant ripples in our eco-system and we seem to not really care about that anymore. > On Jul 3, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> >>> On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >>> >>> Hi everbody. >>> >>> >>> I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage >>> to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get >>> out to the people. >>> >>> Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. >>> Containing some security fixes, plus >>> >>> >>> - Java 8 Update 172 >>> - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >> What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for 1.10.x? > > What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we build with Java 8 we can use it... ;-) > My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept what can be done with AOO 4.1.x. > > But of course we can build with 1.9.x if that is wanted? > > Regards, >Matthias > >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
What impact has Ant 1.10.x exactly on older machines? It is no problem for me to build the Windows version with Ant 1.9.12. As long as we use Java 8. But again, I just did a personal build to test AOO 4.1.x with Java 8. Nothing else. To be more precise: I was the only one who cared. No response from other members! Am 03.07.2018 um 23:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was no longer supported plus had some > sort of security related issue making it unsuited for AOO... ie, we *needed* > to use Ant 1.10 not just that we now *can* use it. > > How about showing some sympathy and understanding for those who may be stuck > w/ older machines? After all, let's be real, our continued support for > "older" systems is the only real thing we have going for us... It's these > little things that make significant ripples in our eco-system and we seem to > not really care about that anymore. > >> On Jul 3, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> >> Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hi everbody. I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out to the people. Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. Containing some security fixes, plus - Java 8 Update 172 - Apache Ant 1.10.3 >>> What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for 1.10.x? >> What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we build with Java 8 we can use it... ;-) >> My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept what can be done with AOO 4.1.x. >> >> But of course we can build with 1.9.x if that is wanted? >> >> Regards, >>Matthias >> >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: A 4.1.6 Release
I think Jim is referring to the gstreamer situation, where we decided that we skip CentOS6 more or less for 4.2.0.And one argument was, if they want something they should support us. This is not showing sympathy for a small user group that uses very old software for 2 more years until they have to move to CentOS 7. I personally think that the gstreamer Topic can be solved after we have released a beta version. Damjan and I have pointed out a lot of possible ways to deal with the issue. Just for now I think we have other problems then gstreamer in 4.2.0. I think it is my fault that I put that argument so much in the front line, but that stuck for me. In the last months we had a drop in activity. And more then one topic received not the attention it deserved. I would not conclude that anyone has stopped caring at this point in time. Let us conclude for now: 4.1.x is still in maintenance. And in my opinion we could think of maintaining it until 2020 when CentOS6 drops out of maintenance. Some support from CentOS6 side would be nice. But we need to search someone for this. I have that on my todo list, but did not manage to follow it up. 4.2.0 has I think 3 bugs we know about and that blocks a beta release. Current target for building with gstreamer is CentOS7. Building without gstreamer could be done on CentOS6. We should keep the code in trunc CentOS 6 compatible where ever we can for now. That will make it easy to back port patches to 4.1.x if we decide to maintain 4.1.x until EOL of CentOS6. All these decisions can wait a little longer. For me that is the current strategy. @Jim: I hope you see there is a lot of "in the flow" around the topic. And it depends also on how the project manages in the future. On 03.07.2018 23:50, Matthias Seidel wrote: What impact has Ant 1.10.x exactly on older machines? It is no problem for me to build the Windows version with Ant 1.9.12. As long as we use Java 8. But again, I just did a personal build to test AOO 4.1.x with Java 8. Nothing else. To be more precise: I was the only one who cared. No response from other members! Am 03.07.2018 um 23:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski: The above made it appear that Ant 1.9.x was no longer supported plus had some sort of security related issue making it unsuited for AOO... ie, we *needed* to use Ant 1.10 not just that we now *can* use it. How about showing some sympathy and understanding for those who may be stuck w/ older machines? After all, let's be real, our continued support for "older" systems is the only real thing we have going for us... It's these little things that make significant ripples in our eco-system and we seem to not really care about that anymore. On Jul 3, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Am 03.07.2018 um 21:45 schrieb Jim Jagielski: On Jul 1, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hi everbody. I would like to bring a 4.1.6 Release on the way in July. Even if we manage to get 4.2.0 ready it will only be a beta. And we have some stuff to get out to the people. Matthias has created a suggestion for a 4.1.6 release on security. Containing some security fixes, plus - Java 8 Update 172 - Apache Ant 1.10.3 What is wrong w/ Apache Ant 1.9.12? Why the need for 1.10.x? What is wrong with Ant 1.10.x? If we build with Java 8 we can use it... ;-) My test build was just a Proof-of-Concept what can be done with AOO 4.1.x. But of course we can build with 1.9.x if that is wanted? Regards, Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
