Compiling Openoffice 1.0.2.-Success stories?

Message

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:24 am

I am trying to build Ooo1.0.2 from source (emerge openoffice).
But, the process crashes after some 9 hours

(Althlon XP 2000+ 512 MB DDR):
See the bug report. And I'm not the only one experiencing problems.

I was wondering: has anyone succesfully built Openoffice 1.0.2?
If so, can you post your USE flags and C(XX)FLAGS from make.conf here?

Mine are:

USE="freetype truetype sse -gnome alsa -oss cups libvorbis gtk2"
# Host Setting
# ============
MAKEOPTS="-j2"
CC="gcc"
CXX="g++"

CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -mmmx -m3dnow -O3 -pipe"
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"

And they fail.

cyfred · Post by **cyfred** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:28 am

I know it may be un-gentoo like but I prefer to use the binaries because after 5 compile attempts, one with NO optimisations the compile still failed, and that was on my Celeron 566 so it took absolutly ages -- think I left it running for 24hrs at one stage.

It was my understanding that the binaries were optimised for i686 and that was it, so maybe the Ooo ebuild / packagers could shed some light on how they did it.

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:49 am

Stay ontopic please

[edit] OOo 1.0.1-r3 built prefectly for me last week

plate · Post by **plate** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:55 am

It is my firm belief that a curse lies on Openoffice that seems to affect only Gentooists, possibly because we're considered more clever than users of other distributions, and someone out there thinks we should prove it from time to time. May I publicly admit that I, for my part, can't get it to work? Java errors 65280 have been plaguing me since 1.0.1-r3.

By the way, even the binary 1.0.2 ebuild was impossible to install today unless you deleted a blank line at the end of the digest... Now on to manually making the font bug disappear and add the icons to the KDE menu...

TAF · Post by **TAF** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 10:53 am

No problems here, it took 10 hours in an PentiumIII-M @ 1.2ghz...

sessionID · Post by **sessionID** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 12:52 pm

TAF wrote:No problems here, it took 10 hours in an PentiumIII-M @ 1.2ghz...

Can You tell how much disk space it needs?
I don't want to s*ck with that, cuz' I only have 1.5 gig free

TAF · Post by **TAF** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 1:29 pm

I've no idea...
But i've read somewhere it needs about 5gigs...

sessionID · Post by **sessionID** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 1:48 pm

Looks like no OOo 1.0.2 for me

Daganoth · Post by **Daganoth** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 1:51 pm

Hmmmm...I never expected it too be that big! I, along with sessionID, only have 1.5 gigs free. Well, had would be the correct tense.

Remember:
Gnome-Terminal + No Space on Device + Compiling = BAD ... superblock that is.

Maybe when I my system is done recompiling I'll make a second attempt, this time with a little more room.

pilla · Post by **pilla** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:21 pm

Compiled... it needs about 2.2 GB.

sessionID · Post by **sessionID** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:25 pm

Thx for the info!

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 6:12 pm

AlterEgo wrote:Stay ontopic please

Thanks everyone for staying ontopic

pilla · Post by **pilla** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:00 pm

An interesting detail is that the jvm you have may have influence here.

It asks for blackdown java, but I forced it to install with sun-jdk-1.4.1.01

xlyz · Post by **xlyz** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:46 pm

compiled succesfully at the second trial

first trial error reported on Gentoo stable

steveb · Post by **steveb** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 6:43 pm

compiled the app-office/openoffice-1.0.2 ebuild without any problems

command used:

Code: Select all

time ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge openoffice

time:

Code: Select all

real    765m59.387s
user    454m45.140s
sys     21m35.020s

system: AMD@1.4GHz with 1.5GB memory

cheers

SteveB

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:21 pm

To my own surprise, my 2nd attempt to compile OOo 1.0.2 has been successful.
The odd thing is: I changed nothing that related to the error message earlier:

`/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.0.2/work/oo_1.0.2_src/solver/641/unxlngi4.pro/lib/libstdc++.so.5.0.1':
No such file or directory
dmake: Error code 1, while making ../unxlngi4.pro/bin/udk3.0.1/linux/lib/libstdc++.so.5.0.1'
---* RULES.MK *---

ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making
/var/tmp/portage/openoffice-1.0.2/work/oo_1.0.2_src/product/util

!!! ERROR: app-office/openoffice-1.0.2 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 380, Exitcode 1
!!! Build failed!

libstdc++.so.5.0.1 still is not there.

I just lowered the CFLAGS a bit more; from
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -mmmx -m3dnow -O3 -pipe"
to:
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -Os -pipe"

/me is confused, happy but confused

pilla · Post by **pilla** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:28 pm

AlterEgo, maybe they changed some small thing in the ebuild.

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 7:51 pm

Bloody Bastard wrote:AlterEgo, maybe they changed some small thing in the ebuild.

Thanks for the suggestion,
but there's no sign of that in the changelog; the filename date, 29.01.03 16:50 also makes me feel that the ebuild has not been changed. I also spent quite a bit of time staring at the ebuild a few days ago, and it looks the same to me

.

[edit] The ebuild HAS changed now. (see bug report)

agentwd40 · Post by **agentwd40** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 11:13 pm

No problems compiling

Java set to blackdown-jre-1.3.1-r7 on a p3 700 512mb ram

cflags: "-march=pentium3 -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -fforce-addr -falign-functions=4 -fprefetch-loop-arrays"

Took like 24 hours but it was worth it

steveb · Post by **steveb** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:21 am

another success story.

AMD 1.4GHz with 512MB memory:

Code: Select all

real    518m47.454s
user    442m58.120s
sys     19m48.500s

cheers

SteveB

steveb · Post by **steveb** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:50 pm

and once again... another success storry:

Code: Select all

real    710m15.211s
user    619m49.160s
sys     45m23.730s

cpu: intel pentium III 1GHz with 384MB memory (IBM ThinkPad A22p)

cheers

SteveB

max_colby · Post by **max_colby** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:18 pm

The ebuild failed using blackdown 1.4.1 beta, sun-jdk 1.4.1, and sun-j2sdk 1.4.1, but everything compiled successfully using blackdown-jdk-1.3.1-r7

AlterEgo · Post by **AlterEgo** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:27 pm

I can say I built OOo using blackdown 1.4.1 beta succesfully

zhenlin · Post by **zhenlin** » Sun Feb 02, 2003 7:40 am

Code: Select all

epatch ${FILESDIR}/${PV}/${PN}-1.0.1-fix-jdk-1.4.0.patch

Insert this line somewhere before the compile starts and you should be fine. Here is the patch

Code: Select all

*** 189,194 ****
--- 189,196 ----
  
  	einfo "Applying patches..."
  	# This allows JDK 1.4.0 to be used (Prez)
+ 	epatch ${FILESDIR}/${PV}/${PN}-1.0.1-fix-jdk-1.4.0.patch
+ 	
  	epatch ${FILESDIR}/${PV}/${PN}-1.0.0-configure.patch
  
  	# Get OO to build with gcc-3.2's libstdc++.so (Az)

Apply this to the 1.0.1-r3 ebuild and export FORCE_JAVA and you should be able to compile it using 1.4 JDKs.

Yuber · Post by **Yuber** » Tue Feb 04, 2003 1:10 am

ok, so my entire system is using ~x86 keywords, so with all the latest stuff does the lateste openoffice-1.0.2 ebuild have this libstdc problem? I got it about a week ago and I'm wondering if anything has changed ,or if it works.