| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
| OPENSTEP wrote: |
Anyway, HEAD should now build on 10.4 with gcc3.3. Step one of getting to mactel complete. Step two is to get gcc 4 support going on, but I'll poke around at the 10.4 built binary a bit to make sure nothing's shot itself in the head. |
I'm working on it with the 1.1.5rc code, are you using this code or 1.1.4?
Thank you.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
1.1.4. I'm using the stock HEAD checkout pattern without any extra patches right now. I'll probably stick with 1.1.4 until Patrick decides we should move on up.
My thoughts are that if I can ferret out the bugs in 1.1.4 they'll be ferreted out for 1.1.5 and 2.0 as well. Between the shift between build OS, compiler version, and Java VM version, there may be enough to chew even without an architecture shift to boot...
I also tend to work very incrementally when faced with large projects like this. Replacing things in little bits is nice for providing "checkpoints" along the way where you can gauge exactly what change is causing any additional instability  I probably will go back through the 1.1.4 code and audit any of the other portions of code that are included based upon the BUILD_OS_MINOR macros.
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
| OPENSTEP wrote: | | 1.1.4. I'm using the stock HEAD checkout pattern without any extra patches right now. I'll probably stick with 1.1.4 until Patrick decides we should move on up. |
Ok. Then I will test build on that platform. I was working with SRX645_m57 (the release candidate for 1.1.5).
| OPENSTEP wrote: |
My thoughts are that if I can ferret out the bugs in 1.1.4 they'll be ferreted out for 1.1.5 and 2.0 as well. Between the shift between build OS, compiler version, and Java VM version, there may be enough to chew even without an architecture shift to boot... |
This may be true for 1.1.5 but not for 2.0. The codebases between the two are vastly different now.
| OPENSTEP wrote: | I also tend to work very incrementally when faced with large projects like this. Replacing things in little bits is nice for providing "checkpoints" along the way where you can gauge exactly what change is causing any additional instability I probably will go back through the 1.1.4 code and audit any of the other portions of code that are included based upon the BUILD_OS_MINOR macros.
|
This is definately the way to do things. I would suggest looking at the 10.4 issues list on porting.openoffice.org. Looks like several things 'broke' when Tiger was released, mainly to do with gcc 4.0 and the JVM. I've been building on Tiger and there are patches specific for this release that are not needed with Jaguar/Panther. If you apply the fixes to get a good build of OOo 1.1.4/SRX645 on Tiger to a Panther build, they do not work (which makes sense.)
However, I think the build platform that we should shoot for if/when the decision to move to the 2.0 codebase is:
Panther (OOo 2.0 will not build on Jaguar)
JVM 1.4.2 (1.5 is still considered experimental in some areas.)
gcc 3.3 (or 4.0) for a compiler/linker.
Of course we should not abandon the Jaguar/JVM 1.3.1 folks. This may mean having two separate releases of Neo/J, much like OOo with the 1.1.5/2.0 release branches.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
| jjmckenzie51 wrote: | However, I think the build platform that we should shoot for if/when the decision to move to the 2.0 codebase is:
Panther (OOo 2.0 will not build on Jaguar)
JVM 1.4.2 (1.5 is still considered experimental in some areas.)
gcc 3.3 (or 4.0) for a compiler/linker.
Of course we should not abandon the Jaguar/JVM 1.3.1 folks. This may mean having two separate releases of Neo/J, much like OOo with the 1.1.5/2.0 release branches. |
Please see http://trinity.neooffice.orgmodules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1617. I've already stopped working on Jaguar in order to move to Java 1.4.2.
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
Thank you for the reminder, Patrick.
BTW, I am building HEAD with SRX645_m57 with the proposed Java 1.4 updates.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
James,
Have you resolved the copyright ownership issue for all changes that you have made? At some point, I expect that you will have code that you will want to contribute and we will need to figure out who will have copyright ownership to such code. Does your employer own the code or do you?
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
| pluby wrote: | James,
Have you resolved the copyright ownership issue for all changes that you have made? At some point, I expect that you will have code that you will want to contribute and we will need to figure out who will have copyright ownership to such code. Does your employer own the code or do you? |
Patrick and Ed:
The non-compete form was found to be untenable and unenforceable due to the type of business . So, I would guess that I own the code as I don't do it as part of my job for my employer. I will be able to sign the JCA as they do not have rights to my work. It is sort of like if they tried to make claim to a Master's Thesis that I worked on at my own without using company assets. They do, however, retain rights to what I build/create/develop on-the-job. Since working on Neo/J is NOT one of my work tasks, I get to keep it (actually I do share.)
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
That is good news. I have routinely signed similar agreements with employers. Generally, they have all been the same in that what work I created as part of my job is owned by the employer and what I create on my time and with my own equipment is owned by me.
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
| pluby wrote: | | That is good news. I have routinely signed similar agreements with employers. Generally, they have all been the same in that what work I created as part of my job is owned by the employer and what I create on my time and with my own equipment is owned by me. |
Yes, but the rest of the agreement was a non-compete agreement that was basically unenforceable, due to the type of work I (and others in my company) do. I should be able to get the JCA back to Sun soon.
In the meantime, I build Ed and your Java 1.4 code with SRX645_m57, and it appears to work. And the problem of pasting a date cell from Calc into a document in Writer appears to work. The problem may be an anomoly with the Neo/J 1.1 release, which is built upon 1.1.4. The anomoly may have been solved between that release and the rc for 1.1.5.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
| OPENSTEP wrote: | I also tend to work very incrementally when faced with large projects like this. Replacing things in little bits is nice for providing "checkpoints" along the way where you can gauge exactly what change is causing any additional instability I probably will go back through the 1.1.4 code and audit any of the other portions of code that are included based upon the BUILD_OS_MINOR macros.
|
Ed and Patrick:
What is the current status of HEAD. I just updated it and wanted to know if it was safe to attempt a build with it.
Thanks.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
I just checked in my lastest code changes a minute or so ago so feel free to cvs update your neojava directory. The OOo code does not need updating and the OOo portion of the build will not need to be redone if you have already built HEAD in the last month as I am only making changes to the Neo/J custom code.
But you should delete the following files and then invoke "build.patch_package" to generate the "Patch-1" patch that you can apply to an existing NeoOffice/J 1.1 plus Patch-0 installation. Note: the code works but there is still a lot of work to do in the area of fonts, image drawing, some print features, etc. so don't expect it to be perfect:
build.neo_dtrans_patch
build.neo_setup2_patch
build.neo_sfx2_patch
build.neo_stoc_patch
build.neo_vcl_patch
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
| pluby wrote: | I just checked in my lastest code changes a minute or so ago so feel free to cvs update your neojava directory. The OOo code does not need updating and the OOo portion of the build will not need to be redone if you have already built HEAD in the last month as I am only making changes to the Neo/J custom code.
But you should delete the following files and then invoke "build.patch_package" to generate the "Patch-1" patch that you can apply to an existing NeoOffice/J 1.1 plus Patch-0 installation. Note: the code works but there is still a lot of work to do in the area of fonts, image drawing, some print features, etc. so don't expect it to be perfect:
build.neo_dtrans_patch
build.neo_setup2_patch
build.neo_sfx2_patch
build.neo_stoc_patch
build.neo_vcl_patch
|
So these changes are for the 1.1 release, correct. I was looking to update both the 1.1 release and the 1.2 'alpha'.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
| jjmckenzie51 wrote: | | So these changes are for the 1.1 release, correct. I was looking to update both the 1.1 release and the 1.2 'alpha'. |
No, HEAD = Neo/J 1.2 Alpha. The reason that it generates a "Patch-1" for Neo/J 1.1 is that I am not crazy enough to put out a full release on my first try at the Java 1.4 upgrade when only a few libraries are affected. Bandwidth is never cheap and I expect that the Java 1.4 changes will take a few patch cycles to work out the kinks.
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
| pluby wrote: | | jjmckenzie51 wrote: | | So these changes are for the 1.1 release, correct. I was looking to update both the 1.1 release and the 1.2 'alpha'. |
No, HEAD = Neo/J 1.2 Alpha. The reason that it generates a "Patch-1" for Neo/J 1.1 is that I am not crazy enough to put out a full release on my first try at the Java 1.4 upgrade when only a few libraries are affected. Bandwidth is never cheap and I expect that the Java 1.4 changes will take a few patch cycles to work out the kinks. |
Ok. I will try to get it again.
I'm using the following cvs command:
-z3 checkout -r HEAD NeoOfficeJ
Is that correct? (I know that -z determines the amount of compression used and with my connection 3 is the best level.)
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
The "NeoOfficeJ" at the end isn't necessary...just go into your neojava subdirectory to execut e the cvs command.
Make sure you add in a -d -P to that too to get any new directories like the etc additions. So you want to cd neojava and do:
cvs -z3 checkout -rHEAD -d -P
(the old CVS server here is slow processor wise so I'm really unsure if -z3 will speed up your download, but I appreciate the bandwidth consideration  )
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
