You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to api@openoffice.apache.org by Hans Zybura <hz...@zybura.com> on 2014/09/03 11:00:09 UTC
Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Hi,
customers report a problem when trying to install our extension on AOO 4.1.1
/ MacOS 10.9.4. : Extension Manager says something like 'Extension will not
run on this computer'. Unfortunately, I cannot test this configuration
myself, because I don't have a Mac with an up-to-date MacOS where I can
install AOO 4.1.1 . The problem is specific to MacOS - our extension is
fully compatible with AOO 4.1.1 on Windows.
We didn't have any problems reported so far with our extension on AOO 4.1
and MacOS Maverick, so I'm rather surprised. My question is: Are there any
known differences between AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1 concerning compatibility of
extensions?
Thank you for your thoughts.
Hans
Hans Zybura Software
Waldquellenweg 52
33649 Bielefeld
Fon: +49-(0)521-45366-590
Fax: +49-(0)521-45366-559
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Hans Zybura <hz...@zybura.com>.
Hi Ariel,
> Hi Hans,
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:05:12PM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> > I missed looking up your link to
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
> >
> > because I thought the information in the DevGuide
> >
> >
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Tar
> > get_Platform
> >
> > should and would be valid and exhaustive. Highly important issue
> > 124783 is not even mentioned there, while a different, but
> > comparatively minor issue is.
>
> Certainly no, but the Developer's Guide is not the place to document such
> version related particularities; for example, most of the tokens listed as
> "supported" are not really supported anymore because since the move to
> the Apache Software Foundation only Win32, Linux 32/64, MacOSX
> 32 (AOO < 4.1)/64 ( AOO >= 4.1.0) are released.
>
> > > in fact, setting the platform to anything else than "all" will fail.
> >
> > Oh! Since when is this known? Where else is this important piece of
> > information available? Issue 124783 only says that token macosx_x86_64
> > will cause an error and prevent installation. It does not say that one
> > can't use any other token than "all". - OK, I see now that it follows
> > logically, but it's not very obvious, isn't it?
>
> Well, yes, IMO it's logic and obvious: if an extension target for MacOSX
64
>
> - cannot be installed with a wrong platform token
> - but cannot be installed with the proper platform token
> - then, don't set the platform in description.xml or set it to "all"
>
> > Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide?
>
> IMO, no, that's not the place for such "peculiarities".
>
> > And in the 'Known Issues' part of the Release notes for AOO 4.1 and
> > 4.1.1?
>
> IMO the Release Notes are targeted to End-Users, and adding this to the
> "Known Issues" will only confuse End-User.
Let me cite the Release Notes (4.1 / 4.1.1):
"For the MacOSX version only, any extensions that are written in C++ will no
longer work and be marked as disabled in the AOO extensions manager. This is
because of the change of AOO from a 32-bit to a 64-bit application on
MacOSX. Please report the problem to the developer of the extension."
So why not mention the token bug?
> An extension developer that is
> developing a non-cross-platform extension for MacOSX should already be
> aware of the switch to 64 bit and the bug with platform="macosx_x86_64"
> (assuming that that developer will at least try to install his own
extension).
>
> > > > Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain
> > > > any direct system calls, so we don't expect any problems by a
> > > > change to a 64-bit AOO.
> > >
> > > No, and you don't need to set the platform if your extension has
> > > only OOBasic code!
> >
> > This is a severe misjudgment - maybe due to a kind of "programming
> > centered" point of view. Code alone doesn't make a product. There are
> > quite a lot of other possible reasons to mark and distribute platform
> > specific editions of an extension - in spite of full code
> > compatibility. E.g. platform specific non-code components included
> > with an extension, product security, preventing customers from
> > installing the wrong thing for their platform, or considerations
> > concerning marketing and distribution, to name a few.
>
> The "has *only* OOBasic code" means that your extension is cross-platform
> and does not have any platform-specific "stuff". But this is getting
off-topic,
> and it is still unclear what your specific problem was, because:
>
> > We didn't have any problems reported so far with our extension on AOO
> > 4.1 and MacOS Maverick, so I'm rather surprised.
>
> If your extension was working in MacOSX with 4.1.0, it should still work
with
> 4.1.1, that's all, there were no changes in between.
The extension just can't be newly installed on MacOS/AOO 4.1.x, due to the
platform token bug. In our case, the problem is not that the extension isn't
working. This may be the reason why we didn't already have any users
complaining, when AOO 4.1 arrived: there were simply no new installations on
AOO 4.1 of our extension since that time - or nobody asked us. The
complaints came from 2 users who had just bought a new Mac, installed AOO
4.1.1 and then couldn't install our extension.
>
> Now, if you released a platform-specific version of your extension, and
set
> platform="macosx_x86_64", I assume you tried at least to install the
> extension (in 4.1.0 or 4.1.1, it does not matter) before releasing it (not
sure if
> it is something logical and obvious; but it wouldn't be serious not to do
so).
As I said in my first post: we don't have a Mac yet with MacOS >10.6.x, so
we couldn't test with AOO 4.1.x on a newer Mac. The world is just not such
an ideal place for small businesses as you seem to think.
About 97% of our users prefer Microsoft Office and our product (add-in)
based on Word. Of the 3% AOO (and LibreOffice) users of our Writer extension
product variety with similar functionality, more than 80% use it on Windows.
For a product like ours in the education market, where users tend to work
with the same computer hardware for more than 10 years, the number of
OpenOffice users with a newer MacOS where 64bit AOO 4.1.x can be installed
comes down to maybe a small two digit range.
So you might understand that I simply don't have the time to constantly read
through all the bug reports on AOO dev or api mailing list, or search
through all issues, though I try. A bug like issue 124783 is really not a
thing I tend to search for extensively - why would I? And I simply don't
have the time to test our extension with every new release of AOO (or
LibreOffice - brrrr) on all platforms without concrete reason. Usually with
new minor releases a test on Windows will do. (Well, this time it didn't,
unfortunately.)
Conclusion: A proper developer documentation and Release Notes that are more
extension developer friendly would be helpful and very much appreciated.
Thanks for your comments, anyway.
Hans
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 10/09/2014 20:07, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:05:12PM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
>> Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide?
> IMO, no, that's not the place for such "peculiarities".
It can be a place until we still have the bug in our stable version. The
wikis support all kinds of "warning" paragraphs, and we could link to
the issue or include a very short text even if this is a temporary
issue. It's already fixed for the next release, but the next release is
not coming very soon.
> IMO the Release Notes are targeted to End-Users, and adding this to the
> "Known Issues" will only confuse End-User. An extension developer that
> is developing a non-cross-platform extension for MacOSX should already
> be aware of the switch to 64 bit
Adding a sentence like
---
Extension Developers should ensure that their extensions specify
platform="all" in description.xml, see
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
---
won't harm. I mean, if extension developers can't easily find this
information through other channels, at least users have a resource to
point them to.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
Hi Hans,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:05:12PM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> I missed looking up your link to
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
>
> because I thought the information in the DevGuide
>
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Platform
>
> should and would be valid and exhaustive. Highly important issue
> 124783 is not even mentioned there, while a different, but
> comparatively minor issue is.
Certainly no, but the Developer's Guide is not the place to document
such version related particularities; for example, most of the tokens
listed as "supported" are not really supported anymore because since the
move to the Apache Software Foundation only Win32, Linux 32/64, MacOSX
32 (AOO < 4.1)/64 ( AOO >= 4.1.0) are released.
> > in fact, setting the platform to anything else than "all" will fail.
>
> Oh! Since when is this known? Where else is this important piece of
> information available? Issue 124783 only says that token macosx_x86_64
> will cause an error and prevent installation. It does not say that one
> can't use any other token than "all". - OK, I see now that it follows
> logically, but it's not very obvious, isn't it?
Well, yes, IMO it's logic and obvious: if an extension target for MacOSX 64
- cannot be installed with a wrong platform token
- but cannot be installed with the proper platform token
- then, don't set the platform in description.xml or set it to "all"
> Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide?
IMO, no, that's not the place for such "peculiarities".
> And in the 'Known Issues' part of the Release notes for AOO 4.1 and
> 4.1.1?
IMO the Release Notes are targeted to End-Users, and adding this to the
"Known Issues" will only confuse End-User. An extension developer that
is developing a non-cross-platform extension for MacOSX should already
be aware of the switch to 64 bit and the bug with
platform="macosx_x86_64" (assuming that that developer will at least try
to install his own extension).
> > > Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain
> > > any direct system calls, so we don't expect any problems by
> > > a change to a 64-bit AOO.
> >
> > No, and you don't need to set the platform if your extension has
> > only OOBasic code!
>
> This is a severe misjudgment - maybe due to a kind of "programming
> centered" point of view. Code alone doesn't make a product. There are
> quite a lot of other possible reasons to mark and distribute platform
> specific editions of an extension - in spite of full code
> compatibility. E.g. platform specific non-code components included
> with an extension, product security, preventing customers from
> installing the wrong thing for their platform, or considerations
> concerning marketing and distribution, to name a few.
The "has *only* OOBasic code" means that your extension is
cross-platform and does not have any platform-specific "stuff". But this
is getting off-topic, and it is still unclear what your specific
problem was, because:
> We didn't have any problems reported so far with our extension on AOO
> 4.1 and MacOS Maverick, so I'm rather surprised.
If your extension was working in MacOSX with 4.1.0, it should still work
with 4.1.1, that's all, there were no changes in between.
Now, if you released a platform-specific version of your extension, and
set platform="macosx_x86_64", I assume you tried at least to install the
extension (in 4.1.0 or 4.1.1, it does not matter) before releasing it
(not sure if it is something logical and obvious; but it wouldn't be
serious not to do so).
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 10/09/2014 Hans Zybura wrote:
>> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile [mailto:arielch@apache.org]
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Platform
>> in fact, setting the platform to anything else
>> than "all" will fail.
> Oh! Since when is this known? Where else is this important piece of
> information available? Issue 124783 only says that token macosx_x86_64 will
> cause an error and prevent installation. It does not say that one can't use
> any other token than "all". - OK, I see now that it follows logically, but
> it's not very obvious, isn't it?
Indeed it's not obvious. This must be fixed.
> Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide? And in the
> 'Known Issues' part of the Release notes for AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1?
Well, since you now know what's useful to developers, just propose a
text and we can add it (the Release Notes for 4.1 contain user-oriented
remarks about this but indeed nothing that can help developers).
Or just ask and we will create accounts for you so that you can edit
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Platform
and
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1+Release+Notes
accordingly. They are wiki pages and the only reason we restrict their
modification is to combat spam.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Hans Zybura <hz...@zybura.com>.
Thanks again. Some more comments below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile [mailto:arielch@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 7:05 PM
> To: api@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
>
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:44:38AM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> > Thank you, Ariel.
> >
> > meanwhile I've found the problem. We didn't have the new platform
> > token 'macosx_x86_64' in the description.xml of the mac version of our
> extension.
>
> No, the problem, as stated in the bug, is that the platform in
description.xml
> is broken in MacOSX since 4.1; setting the platform to
> macosx_x86_64 won't work;
I missed looking up your link to
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
because I thought the information in the DevGuide
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Pl
atform
should and would be valid and exhaustive. Highly important issue 124783 is
not even mentioned there, while a different, but comparatively minor issue
is.
> in fact, setting the platform to anything else
> than "all" will fail.
Oh! Since when is this known? Where else is this important piece of
information available? Issue 124783 only says that token macosx_x86_64 will
cause an error and prevent installation. It does not say that one can't use
any other token than "all". - OK, I see now that it follows logically, but
it's not very obvious, isn't it?
Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide? And in the
'Known Issues' part of the Release notes for AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1?
>> Some more questions concerning 64-bit versions/plans:
>>
> > 1. Is AOO 4.1.1 the first version, where this new token is necessary
> > on MacOS? Or was it obligatory in 4.1.0 already (and it was by pure
> > chance that we didn't have any customers complaining)?
> 4.1 is the version where OpenOffice changed from 32 bit to 64 bit in
MacOSX. As said before, the > platform is only necessary if your extension
is not multi-platform.
>> 2. Will there be a 64-bit version of AOO on Windows and a win_x86_64
>> token anytime soon?
> No.
>
> But you only need to set the platform in description.xml if your extension
is
> targeted to run on a specific platform. Please read
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Targ
> et_Platform
I had indeed looked into the DevGuide about target platforms, of course.
That is where I found the new token macosx_x86_64 in the first place. If
only there had been a hint to the issue in question!
> > Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain any
> > direct system calls, so we don't expect any problems by a change to a
64-bit
> AOO.
>
> No, and you don't need to set the platform if your extension has only
> OOBasic code!
This is a severe misjudgment - maybe due to a kind of "programming centered"
point of view. Code alone doesn't make a product. There are quite a lot of
other possible reasons to mark and distribute platform specific editions of
an extension - in spite of full code compatibility. E.g. platform specific
non-code components included with an extension, product security, preventing
customers from installing the wrong thing for their platform, or
considerations concerning marketing and distribution, to name a few.
Regards, Hans Zybura
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:44:38AM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> Thank you, Ariel.
>
> meanwhile I've found the problem. We didn't have the new platform token
> 'macosx_x86_64' in the description.xml of the mac version of our extension.
No, the problem, as stated in the bug, is that the platform in
description.xml is broken in MacOSX since 4.1; setting the platform to
macosx_x86_64 won't work; in fact, setting the platform to anything else
than "all" will fail.
But you only need to set the platform in description.xml if your
extension is targeted to run on a specific platform. Please read
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Platform
> Some more questions concerning 64-bit versions/plans:
>
> 1. Is AOO 4.1.1 the first version, where this new token is necessary on
> MacOS? Or was it obligatory in 4.1.0 already (and it was by pure chance that
> we didn't have any customers complaining)?
4.1 is the version where OpenOffice changed from 32 bit to 64 bit in
MacOSX. As said before, the platform is only necessary if your extension
is not multi-platform.
> 2. Will there be a 64-bit version of AOO on Windows and a win_x86_64 token
> anytime soon?
No.
> Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain any direct
> system calls, so we don't expect any problems by a change to a 64-bit AOO.
No, and you don't need to set the platform if your extension has only
OOBasic code! That's why I asked you to post the description.xml, the
error 'Extension will not run on this computer' suggest you are setting
the platform to something different than "all". And setting it to
"macosx_x86_64" won't work until the next minor release (the fix for bug
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783 isn't integrated in
4.1.1).
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
RE: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Hans Zybura <hz...@zybura.com>.
Thank you, Ariel.
meanwhile I've found the problem. We didn't have the new platform token
'macosx_x86_64' in the description.xml of the mac version of our extension.
Some more questions concerning 64-bit versions/plans:
1. Is AOO 4.1.1 the first version, where this new token is necessary on
MacOS? Or was it obligatory in 4.1.0 already (and it was by pure chance that
we didn't have any customers complaining)?
2. Will there be a 64-bit version of AOO on Windows and a win_x86_64 token
anytime soon?
Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain any direct
system calls, so we don't expect any problems by a change to a 64-bit AOO.
Thanks again. Your advice is much appreciated.
Regards,
Hans
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile [mailto:arielch@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 2:56 PM
> To: api@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
>
> Hello Hans,
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:00:09AM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > customers report a problem when trying to install our extension on AOO
> > 4.1.1 / MacOS 10.9.4. : Extension Manager says something like
> > 'Extension will not run on this computer'. Unfortunately, I cannot
> > test this configuration myself, because I don't have a Mac with an
> > up-to-date MacOS where I can install AOO 4.1.1 . The problem is
> > specific to MacOS - our extension is fully compatible with AOO 4.1.1 on
> Windows.
> >
> > We didn't have any problems reported so far with our extension on AOO
> > 4.1 and MacOS Maverick, so I'm rather surprised. My question is: Are
> > there any known differences between AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1 concerning
> > compatibility of extensions?
>
> No, there is bug 124783, but is your extension written in C++?
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
>
> Can you attach the description.xml or a link to the extension?
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
Hello Hans,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:00:09AM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> customers report a problem when trying to install our extension on AOO 4.1.1
> / MacOS 10.9.4. : Extension Manager says something like 'Extension will not
> run on this computer'. Unfortunately, I cannot test this configuration
> myself, because I don't have a Mac with an up-to-date MacOS where I can
> install AOO 4.1.1 . The problem is specific to MacOS - our extension is
> fully compatible with AOO 4.1.1 on Windows.
>
> We didn't have any problems reported so far with our extension on AOO 4.1
> and MacOS Maverick, so I'm rather surprised. My question is: Are there any
> known differences between AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1 concerning compatibility of
> extensions?
No, there is bug 124783, but is your extension written in C++?
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783
Can you attach the description.xml or a link to the extension?
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina