Ubuntu Build Instructions

[jorge ivan poot diaz <iv...@gmail.com>]

Hello
I have a problem: Ubuntu Build Instructions

I did all the instructions but eventually tells me I have the following
code:

sudo apt-get install python-dev ccache libgraphite-dev \
libwpd8-dev libxslt-dev libdb4.7-dev libhunspell libneon27-dev-dev-dev
libaltlinuxhyph

Where generates me an error saying that the package libdb4.7-dev is not
available, but some other package refers to it. This may mean that the
package is missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another
source.

1. What should I do?
2. What are the possible causes of this?
3. Shortness requirements to install?
4. I'm using Ubuntu 10.4
5. I installed OpenJDK.

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>]

On 1/31/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2013 2:56 PM, "Andre Fischer" <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 31.01.2013 14:50, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>>>>
>>>> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
>>>>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
>>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
>>>> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a
> different page name anew. The developer who created the new page obviously
> wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should have updated it,
> wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)
>>
>>
>> No, he would not have.  One is a step by step instruction without much
> explanation.
>> The other details the general procedure of build AOO, without giving a
> command line for every step.
> 
> but it still highlight the problem I had in the beginning...our wiki has
> really much valuable information, but to an extent it is shadowed by
> identical information which are not maintained.
> 
> I searched for ubuntu build instruction way back, and as you can imagine
> got confused. Thx. to the brilliant help from this list I got it up and
> running.
> 
> I hope we in the short future can get our wiki a bit streamlined (I am not
> thinking about removing information, but simply mark it as outdated, with a
> link to the newer information.

we should think about transition in the way to link very clearly to the
preferred and up-to-date page and mark old pages outdated or better
deprecated. Let's say 3 month later we can redirect old pages directly
to the new page to preserve external links or we can delete them.

But in general I totally agree we have many information in the wiki but
often not easy to find. Rework and clean up would be very much
appreciated and wold help the project and especially our users.

We should more radical drop really outdated, not longer interesting and
used stuff.


>>
>> Please see last sentence in
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Preface
> 
> @herbert regarding buildbot, I can see your point and agree with it.
> However I still think we should document exactly how our binary
> distributables are made. I have actually not been able to produce an exact
> match yet where I have tried. When people want to play with the system it
> is nice to have a stable start like rebuilding the release and the same
> result.
> 
> Jan I
>>
>> -Andre
>>
> 

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[janI <ja...@apache.org>]

On 31 January 2013 16:29, Herbert Dürr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On 31.01.2013 15:55, janI wrote:
>
>> but it still highlight the problem I had in the beginning...our wiki has
>> really much valuable information, but to an extent it is shadowed by
>> identical information which are not maintained.
>>
>> I searched for ubuntu build instruction way back, and as you can imagine
>> got confused. Thx. to the brilliant help from this list I got it up and
>> running.
>>
>> I hope we in the short future can get our wiki a bit streamlined (I am not
>> thinking about removing information, but simply mark it as outdated, with
>> a
>> link to the newer information.
>>
>
> I totally agree and try to do it whenever I stumble over something like
> this. I'd also suggest to reuse pages even if they contain obsoleted
> content. If their title is general purpose,  is linked to from many other
> places and easily findable then updating them is a better solution IMHO. If
> anyone needs to access their older outdated content it is good to know that
> it is still available via Wiki's wonderful page history feature.
>
>
>  @herbert regarding buildbot, I can see your point and agree with it.
>> However I still think we should document exactly how our binary
>> distributables are made. I have actually not been able to produce an exact
>> match yet where I have tried. When people want to play with the system it
>> is nice to have a stable start like rebuilding the release and the same
>> result.
>>
>
> For the exact configuration switches please see the page [1] I linked to
> in my previous mail. To create an exact match on Linux you'd have to
> install the "oldest common denominator" system that is used to build
> releases. We can ask Ariel to provide all the glorious details of this
> system, AFAIK they are plain RHEL5 and RHEL6, right?
>
> These old systems are great for building maximum-compatibility releases,
> but IMHO they are not much fun For developing. I personally love having
> up-to-date versions of gdb, valgrind, perf-tools, git-svn, btrfs snapshots,
> KVM/virtualbox, python, etc. but maybe that's just my personal disposition.
>
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
> Development+Snapshot+Builds#**DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-**buildflags<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-buildflags>
>
Herbert I totally agree and use newer versions of a lot, however I have one
VM that I try to keep compareable to buildbot, and when I one of my
(seldom) commits I run a test there first.

Also for "bug" finders, it is important (I think) to test with the same
version.

I wrote it a bit badly, by my idea was to do as you do today, document the
build with new tool, and then in parallel mention that for a compatiable
build you would need xxxx, after all it boils down to getting libraries and
configure. And I am sure Arial could keep us updated on that (That is
easier than answering the questions multiple times in here).

>
> I'm looking forward to see and talk to you on FOSDEM this weekend!
>
I look a lot forward to talk to you, and others who have helped me a lot
during my startup. However I will not be on FOSDEM, that was decided about
a month ago, mainly due to some (for me) bad discussions in here, which at
that time caused me to reconsider the level of my commitment. Today I have
found my commitment, which is more behind the scenes, like updating wiki.

have a nice conference
Jan I




> Herbert
>

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Herbert Dürr <hd...@apache.org>]

On 31.01.2013 15:55, janI wrote:
> but it still highlight the problem I had in the beginning...our wiki has
> really much valuable information, but to an extent it is shadowed by
> identical information which are not maintained.
>
> I searched for ubuntu build instruction way back, and as you can imagine
> got confused. Thx. to the brilliant help from this list I got it up and
> running.
>
> I hope we in the short future can get our wiki a bit streamlined (I am not
> thinking about removing information, but simply mark it as outdated, with a
> link to the newer information.

I totally agree and try to do it whenever I stumble over something like 
this. I'd also suggest to reuse pages even if they contain obsoleted 
content. If their title is general purpose,  is linked to from many 
other places and easily findable then updating them is a better solution 
IMHO. If anyone needs to access their older outdated content it is good 
to know that it is still available via Wiki's wonderful page history 
feature.

> @herbert regarding buildbot, I can see your point and agree with it.
> However I still think we should document exactly how our binary
> distributables are made. I have actually not been able to produce an exact
> match yet where I have tried. When people want to play with the system it
> is nice to have a stable start like rebuilding the release and the same
> result.

For the exact configuration switches please see the page [1] I linked to 
in my previous mail. To create an exact match on Linux you'd have to 
install the "oldest common denominator" system that is used to build 
releases. We can ask Ariel to provide all the glorious details of this 
system, AFAIK they are plain RHEL5 and RHEL6, right?

These old systems are great for building maximum-compatibility releases, 
but IMHO they are not much fun For developing. I personally love having 
up-to-date versions of gdb, valgrind, perf-tools, git-svn, btrfs 
snapshots, KVM/virtualbox, python, etc. but maybe that's just my 
personal disposition.

[1] 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-buildflags

I'm looking forward to see and talk to you on FOSDEM this weekend!
Herbert

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[janI <ja...@apache.org>]

On Jan 31, 2013 2:56 PM, "Andre Fischer" <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 31.01.2013 14:50, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
>>>
>>> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>>>
>>> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
>>>
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
>>> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?
>>
>>
>> Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a
different page name anew. The developer who created the new page obviously
wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should have updated it,
wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)
>
>
> No, he would not have.  One is a step by step instruction without much
explanation.
> The other details the general procedure of build AOO, without giving a
command line for every step.

but it still highlight the problem I had in the beginning...our wiki has
really much valuable information, but to an extent it is shadowed by
identical information which are not maintained.

I searched for ubuntu build instruction way back, and as you can imagine
got confused. Thx. to the brilliant help from this list I got it up and
running.

I hope we in the short future can get our wiki a bit streamlined (I am not
thinking about removing information, but simply mark it as outdated, with a
link to the newer information.
>
> Please see last sentence in
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Preface

@herbert regarding buildbot, I can see your point and agree with it.
However I still think we should document exactly how our binary
distributables are made. I have actually not been able to produce an exact
match yet where I have tried. When people want to play with the system it
is nice to have a stable start like rebuilding the release and the same
result.

Jan I
>
> -Andre
>

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>]

On 31.01.2013 14:56, Andre Fischer wrote:
> On 31.01.2013 14:50, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
>>> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>>>
>>> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
>>>
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
>>> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?
>>
>> Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a
>> different page name anew. The developer who created the new page
>> obviously wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should
>> have updated it, wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)
>
> No, he would not have.  One is a step by step instruction without much
> explanation.
> The other details the general procedure of build AOO, without giving a
> command line for every step.

Please see the two links Jan provided. The question was to compare
   http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
with
 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step 


You probably misread the question as to compare
   http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO
with
 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step 

and for this pair your answer makes perfect sense.

Herbert

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Andre Fischer <aw...@gmail.com>]

On 31.01.2013 14:50, Herbert Duerr wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
>> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>>
>> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step 
>>
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
>> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?
>
> Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a 
> different page name anew. The developer who created the new page 
> obviously wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should 
> have updated it, wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)

No, he would not have.  One is a step by step instruction without much 
explanation.
The other details the general procedure of build AOO, without giving a 
command line for every step.

Please see last sentence in 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO#Preface

-Andre

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>]

Hi Jan,

On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>
> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?

Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a 
different page name anew. The developer who created the new page 
obviously wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should have 
updated it, wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)

> - I looked at our buildbot, and copied the configure from there, because of
> that I missed some libraries.
> In your opinion should our guides not correspond with our releases, so
> users can rebuild the release ?
> (I did actually update one of the guides, with the missing libs, but cannot
> find the update right now).

Our releases try to be as cross-platform as possible and that means they 
usually build without the "--with-sytem-*" switches. They also have some 
extra baggage, e.g. they carried the "binfilter", which is not really 
interesting to new developers. Also having to install e.g. mingw just to 
build a DLL that is never needed on Linux is IMHO a gratuitous 
requirement for an aspiring AOO developer.

If one is interested in rebuilding a release bit-by-bit one shouldn't 
look at the configuration the buildbot is using but on the configuration 
details documented on the dev-preview page [1].

[1] 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds

The buildbots are not only for building release, some have different 
purposes, e.g. the linux buildbots for nightly trunk build create usable 
versions but without binfilter or mozilla integration. Their main task 
is to find whether recent commits broke e.g. a dependency like they did 
last night [2].

[2] 
http://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-nightly/builds/502/steps/shell/logs/stdio

The linux buildbots are also a bit "too up to date". Linux is very good 
with backward compatibility but forward compatibility is a problem. To 
build a binaries that run on as many different target systems as 
possible one either has to use the oldest common denominator or one has 
to go to great lengths to make the output binary compatible [3]. Another 
consideration is that ASF infra doesn't like having "old crappy systems" 
in their bot farm which would be a requirement if we tried the first 
approach to maximum binary compatibility. So we use the systems that are 
available at the bot farm and they do a great job in finding interesting 
stuff.

[3] http://www.trevorpounds.com/blog/?p=103

Herbert

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[janI <ja...@apache.org>]

@Herbert:

Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:

- there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions
I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?

- I looked at our buildbot, and copied the configure from there, because of
that I missed some libraries.
In your opinion should our guides not correspond with our releases, so
users can rebuild the release ?
(I did actually update one of the guides, with the missing libs, but cannot
find the update right now).


have a nice day.
jan I

On 31 January 2013 13:47, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On 31.01.2013 07:37, jorge ivan poot diaz wrote:
>
>> Thank you for your help. I sorry for not write good my questions. The
>> number 3:
>> - Lack requirement to install?
>>
>
> The configure step [1] will help you find out whether something else is
> missing.
>
> [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Ubuntu_Build_**
> Instructions#Testing_the_**Prerequisites<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions#Testing_the_Prerequisites>
>
> Thanks for your questions! By updating the wiki page [1] I hope I made
> some things more clear. Unfortunately it was not maintained for a while, so
> if you find something else missing or unclear please don't hesitate to ask.
>
> [2] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions<http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions>
>
> Regarding libdb and libneon that we mentioned yesterday I now remember
> that they had been obsoleted by our big cleanup [2] of external
> dependencies for Apache OpenOffice. I updated the Wiki page for this too.
>
> [3] http://s.apache.org/aoo_**initial_ip_cleanup<http://s.apache.org/aoo_initial_ip_cleanup>
>
> Hope that helps,
> Herbert
>

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>]

On 31.01.2013 07:37, jorge ivan poot diaz wrote:
> Thank you for your help. I sorry for not write good my questions. The
> number 3:
> - Lack requirement to install?

The configure step [1] will help you find out whether something else is 
missing.

[1] 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions#Testing_the_Prerequisites

Thanks for your questions! By updating the wiki page [1] I hope I made 
some things more clear. Unfortunately it was not maintained for a while, 
so if you find something else missing or unclear please don't hesitate 
to ask.

[2] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions

Regarding libdb and libneon that we mentioned yesterday I now remember 
that they had been obsoleted by our big cleanup [2] of external 
dependencies for Apache OpenOffice. I updated the Wiki page for this too.

[3] http://s.apache.org/aoo_initial_ip_cleanup

Hope that helps,
Herbert

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[jorge ivan poot diaz <iv...@gmail.com>]

Hello
Herbert Duerr,


Thank you for your help. I sorry for not write good my questions. The
number 3:
- Lack requirement to install?


Regards
Ivan Poot


2013/1/30 AlanSan <al...@gmail.com>

> Le 01/29/2013 09:41 PM, jorge ivan poot diaz a écrit :
>
>  Hello
>> I have a problem: Ubuntu Build Instructions
>>
>> I did all the instructions but eventually tells me I have the following
>> code:
>>
>> sudo apt-get install python-dev ccache libgraphite-dev \
>> libwpd8-dev libxslt-dev libdb4.7-dev libhunspell libneon27-dev-dev-dev
>> libaltlinuxhyph
>>
>> Where generates me an error saying that the package libdb4.7-dev is not
>> available, but some other package refers to it. This may mean that the
>> package is missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another
>> source.
>>
>> 1. What should I do?
>> 2. What are the possible causes of this?
>> 3. Shortness requirements to install?
>> 4. I'm using Ubuntu 10.4
>> 5. I installed OpenJDK.
>>
>>  Hello Ivan, this error happens because canonical has been removed this
> library
> from their repositories, you can download the library from this page:
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+**source/db4.7/4.7.25-10<https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/db4.7/4.7.25-10>
>
> AlanSan.
>

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[AlanSan <al...@gmail.com>]

Le 01/29/2013 09:41 PM, jorge ivan poot diaz a écrit :
> Hello
> I have a problem: Ubuntu Build Instructions
>
> I did all the instructions but eventually tells me I have the following
> code:
>
> sudo apt-get install python-dev ccache libgraphite-dev \
> libwpd8-dev libxslt-dev libdb4.7-dev libhunspell libneon27-dev-dev-dev
> libaltlinuxhyph
>
> Where generates me an error saying that the package libdb4.7-dev is not
> available, but some other package refers to it. This may mean that the
> package is missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another
> source.
>
> 1. What should I do?
> 2. What are the possible causes of this?
> 3. Shortness requirements to install?
> 4. I'm using Ubuntu 10.4
> 5. I installed OpenJDK.
>
Hello Ivan, this error happens because canonical has been removed this 
library
from their repositories, you can download the library from this page: 
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/db4.7/4.7.25-10

AlanSan.

Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions

[Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>]

Hi Jorge,

On 30.01.2013 04:41, jorge ivan poot diaz wrote:
> I have a problem: Ubuntu Build Instructions
>
> I did all the instructions but eventually tells me I have the following
> code:
>
> sudo apt-get install python-dev ccache libgraphite-dev \
> libwpd8-dev libxslt-dev libdb4.7-dev libhunspell libneon27-dev-dev-dev
> libaltlinuxhyph
>
> Where generates me an error saying that the package libdb4.7-dev is not
> available, but some other package refers to it. This may mean that the
> package is missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another
> source.
>
> 1. What should I do?

Adjust the package names to what the system can provide:
According to [1] the name of the libdb development package for Ubuntu 
10.4 (aka "Lucid Lynx") seems to be "libdb4.3-dev".

[1] http://packages.ubuntu.com/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=libdb

> 2. What are the possible causes of this?

Package names change depending on the Ubuntu/Debian/etc. release. IMHO 
it would have been better if the build instructions were written in a 
more generic way, e.g.
     apt-get install libdb-dev
works too. I'm not sure when this apt-get feature was introduced though. 
On the other hand
     apt-get install libneon-dev
requires an interaction with the generic package name because it is a 
virtual package backed by several real packages. Anyway, I changed the 
wiki page [2] for more independence from the Ubuntu version.

[2] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Build_Instructions

> 3. Shortness requirements to install?

I don't understand this question. Could you rephrase it?

Hope that helps,
Herbert