Excessive dependancies for OpenOffice 2.0 port

Mikhail T. mi at aldan.algebra.com
Sun Nov 6 10:59:08 PST 2005

= On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:18:09PM -0500, Mikhail T. wrote:
= > I'm surprised, you are not objecting to the port's building of its OWN
= > C and C++ compiler, as well as a bunch of "small" things like STLport,
= > db4, expat (yes, it depends on it, but builds its own too!), sablotron,
= > xmlsec, etc. etc.

= I don't think you realise how much work it is to keep OO building even
= with stock vendor sources, let alone with third party versions of
= those packages.

Actually, I do realise that, and, in my opinion, it is _harder_ to keep
it building the current way. The third-party packages -- installed by
other ports -- have their own maintainers, who watch out for build

Building a special version of C compiler is, AFAIK, unprecedented.

The major problem, that the OOo maintainers have created for themselves
is the rebuild of such things as mozilla (old, outdated version) and
STLport4 (old, outdated version). Even when using ccache, these useless
things take A LOT of time and diskspace. Plus, of course, a whole slew
of small items (beginning with dmake).

Maho -- the soul of our openoffice@ team -- is more of an OOo person,
than FreeBSD person. And that's the root of it -- OOo's philosophy with
respect to 3rd-party packages is that it MUST be buildable with the
bundled versions and, OPTIONALLY, with the already installed ones. A
FreeBSD port should be different...

I'm trying to make an OOo port that would work on 64-bit arches (my main
system is amd64). I'm long past the third-party packages problem -- it
is all about 64-bit integers/pointers now...


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list