From owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 22 23:26:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2BB516A4CE; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:26:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailer.gwdg.de (mailer.gwdg.de [134.76.10.26]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6470243D39; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:26:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from farrenkopf@mail.sub.uni-goettingen.de) Received: from sub00261.sub.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.162.89]) by mailer.gwdg.de with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B5gIz-0003Lx-4a; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 08:26:33 +0100 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 08:26:32 +0100 From: Stefan Farrenkopf To: Adam Weinberger , Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <2940000.1080026792@sub00261.sub.uni-goettingen.de> In-Reply-To: <20040322211501.GB87493@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <200403222030.i2MKUsxc063289@8ball.rtp.freebsd.org> <20040322211501.GB87493@toxic.magnesium.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Level: / X-Spam-Report: Content analysis: 0.0 points, 6.0 required X-Virus-Scanned: (clean) by exiscan+sophie cc: ports@FreeBSD.org cc: openoffice@freebsd.org Subject: Re: INDEX build failed X-BeenThere: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Stefan Farrenkopf List-Id: Porting OpenOffice to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 07:26:35 -0000 Hi, --On Monday, March 22, 2004 16:15:01 -0500 Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> (03.22.2004 @ 1530 PST): Kris Kennaway said, in 1.6K: << >> INDEX build failed with errors: >> Warning: Duplicate INDEX entry: openoffice-1.1.1.RC1 >> Warning: Duplicate INDEX entry: es-openoffice-1.1.1.RC1 >>> end of "INDEX build failed" from Kris Kennaway << > > I recognize that it's an unbelievable amount of work to make openoffice > build right, but can development please be done elsewhere? The port > doesn't even build right now (it rejects any jdk I have installed in > configure). If 1.1.1.RC1 isn't working, can you please put 1.1 back in > the tree? > I would like to support Adams statement (after a lot of frustration with unsuccessful attempts to install the port)! cheers, Stefan