openoffice-2 & openssl-beta-0.9.8a

[Benjamin Thelen]

> On Friday 09 December 2005 15:36, Benjamin Thelen wrote:
>> > On Friday 09 December 2005 12:15, Benjamin Thelen wrote:
>> >> You FreeBSD guys,
>> >>
>> >> This is a kind of reposting, I got no response to this question (Why?
>> Is
>> >> there something wrong how I write my my question(s)?), whether list
>> >> (archives) nor google told me something _really_ helpful - just
>> stupid
>> >> work arounds -sorry.
>> >>
>> >> I suppose there are many of you using the OpenOffice-2.0 package from
>> >> http://porting.openoffice.org/freebsd/ which requires
>> >> openssl-beta-0.9.8a
>> >> to be installed (I don't understand why).
>> >>
>> >> Installing openssl-beta from ports at first doesn't hurt. But at the
>> >> stage
>> >> of portupgrading next time it starts to be a pain, so I end up
>> removing
>> >> openoffice-2 and openssl-beta _before_ I do a portupgrade. If I don't
>> >> remove both ports, any port that requires openssl is built with
>> >> openssl-beta instead of openssl from the base system. If I add
>> >> WITH_OPENSSL_BASE=yes, which seemd to be a good  solution, net-snmp
>> >> (required for kdeutils) complains that it cannot build if there is a
>> >> newer
>> >> openssl version installed by a port. There we are again, byebye
>> >> openssl-beta/openoffice, portupgrade, reinstall both.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I'm a bit of a loss, no answer, no help by google, but I can't be the
>> >> only
>> >> one who faces this problem. How are you dealing with this? Do I
>> overlook
>> >> something?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Ben
>>
>> Mike,
>> Thanks for your answer.
>>
>> > You allready have the answer, you said it works when you build from
>> > ports. If you don't want to always rebuild openoffice when you upgrade
>> > ports mark it as ignored in pkgtools.conf.
>>
>> I already did - just because I don't want to compile OOo. Building OOo-2
>> on a PIII/1,13 isn't very funny. :-). OOo-1.1 was a little nightmare,
>> especially because it took me a while to succeed - you'd surely find on
>> google ;-). Last but not least, I don't have 9 free GBs. Really. :-)
>>
>> I just don't understand why the package I mentioned requires openssl,
>> because I can't see any dependency on openssl, neither for building nor
>> for running.
>>
>>
>> A third way would be to use the ports openssl-beta as systems default?
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> > -Mike
>
> Your better off leaving openssl set to the one in base and building from
> source anything that depends on openssl.  The problem with packages is you
> are at the mercy of how someone else built them.

Mike,

Yes, but this case is a little strange, isn't it? Nobody else is
wondering, there actually is no dependency on openssl, using the ports
openssl, even a beta may be a litte uncommon (?) and I think this URL I
mentioned is the main source for getting OOo as a package.

Despite the problem I face, thanks to Nakata Maho at this point for his work.

>
> I also don't see where the openssl dependency is comming from and have to
> take your word for it the package of open office you tried had one.

Short and clear ;-):

root at trinity# pkg_add
/data/software/freebsd/OOo_2.0m143_FreeBSD60Intel_install_de.tbz
pkg_add: could not find package openssl-beta-0.9.8a !


>
> If your installed open office was built by you and works I highly
> recommend
> you back it up, something like
>
> pkg_create -b /var/db/pkg/openoffice.org-2.0.0_1 and save the resulting
> openoffice.org-2.0.0_1.tgz somewhere safe.  Now if in the future yoy want
> to upgrade it again from source and it doesn't work you always have a
> known
> good copy to fall back on.

That sounds interesting. I never used pkg_create. Thanks for your hint,
I'll have a look at this and look for a fast compiling machine :-)!

Thanks for your response!

Best,
Ben

>
> -Mike
>
>
>
>