From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 4 02:07:41 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D88E516A4CE for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:07:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from bloodwood.hunterlink.net.au (smtp-local.hunterlink.net.au [203.12.144.17]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DCF643D1D for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:07:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from boris@brooknet.com.au) Received: from ppp23E5.dyn.pacific.net.au (ppp23E5.dyn.pacific.net.au [61.8.35.229])iA422QAf013822; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:02:27 +1100 From: Sam Lawrance To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20041103212237.GA10524@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20041103210949.GA2329@laptoxa.toxa.lan> <20041103212237.GA10524@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 13:07:27 +1100 Message-Id: <1099534047.722.2.camel@dirk.no.domain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.1FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: native openoffice 1.1.3 package? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:07:42 -0000 On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 13:22 -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:09:49AM +0300, Toxa wrote: > > On ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6-current/All/ > > we have *-openoffice-1.1.3.tbz for many languages, but what about native > > openoffice package build? Moreover, there's no ru-openoffice-1.1.3.tbz here. > > I'm just wondering about it because OpenOffice-1.1.3 doesn't compiles > > neither on current nor on 5_stable > > The openoffice builds are problematic because they take so long, and > they often time out on the package build cluster (i.e. when multiple > OO builds end up being scheduled on the same machine). Fixing this > properly will require some nontrivial work. Could you adjust the timeout to sort-of scale with a port's distfile size?