Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:43:40 +0200 From: Benjamin Thelen <bt@ccgis.de> To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Install error OOo-1.1.3 on 4.10p3 Message-ID: <4177F54C.20508@ccgis.de> In-Reply-To: <200410201730.i9KHU3pj001657@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <200410201730.i9KHU3pj001657@gw.catspoiler.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Don Lewis wrote:
> On 20 Oct, Benjamin Thelen wrote:
>
>>Hi lists,
>>
>>I am now really stumped and appreciate you for your assistance. I had
>>this very error already with OOo-1.1.2 on three 4.10p2 FreeBSD boxes
>>in the end of August, posted it to the list, but got no answer. I got
>>along by installing a 1.1.0 package and hoped that this error will be
>>solved in future ports.
>>
>>
>>Compiling seems alright. This error-message occurs right after "make
>>install".
>>
>>#
>># UGLY hack to not have to specify a X-Display.
>>#
>>/usr/X11R6/bin/Xvfb :1001 -screen 0 800x600x24 > /dev/null 2>&1 & echo
>>$! > /data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1/work/.Xvfb.pid
>>cd: can't cd to
>>/data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1/work/OOo_1.1.3_src/instsetoo/
>>*.pro/01/normal/
>>*** Error code 2
>>Stop in /data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1.
>
>
> No problems here building and installing on 4.10-STABLE, though in my
> case $DISPLAY is set so my build didn't use Xvfb.
Hi Down,
thanks for your reply.
Well, I did not decide to use Xvfb. Did not know there is such a variable.
> That shouldn't
> matter, though because the directory passed to the cd command appears to
> be the same in either case:
> ${WRKSRC}/instsetoo/*.pro/${LANG_EXT}/normal/
>
> I wonder if you ran into some sort of build problem that didn't get
> caught. The end of the build should look like:
>
> Replacing ${PRODUCTNAME} with OpenOffice.org
> Replacing ${PRODUCTVERSION} with 1.1.3
>
> time needed: 0:1:0
>
>
> WARNING! Project(s):
> gtk
>
> not found and couldn't be built. Correct build.lsts.
I now remember again, I saw that ending on a posting some time ago. No
mine looks really different (that is how it allways looked):
then mv -f ".deps/rulparse.Tpo" ".deps/rulparse.Po"; \
else rm -f ".deps/rulparse.Tpo"; exit 1; \
fi
if gcc32 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I. -I. -I./unix/linux -I./unix
-I./unix/li nux/gnu -g -O2 -MT percent.o -MD -MP -MF
".deps/percent.Tpo" \ -c -o percent.o `test -f 'percent.c' || echo
'./'`percent.c; \ then mv -f ".deps/percent.Tpo" ".deps/percent.Po"; \
else rm -f ".deps/percent.Tpo"; exit 1; \
fi
if gcc32 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I. -I. -I./unix/linux -I./unix
-I./unix/linux/gnu -g -O2 -MT function.o -MD -MP -MF
".deps/function.Tpo" \ -c -o function.o `test -f 'function.c' || echo
'./'`function.c; \ then mv -f ".deps/function.Tpo"
".deps/function.Po"; \ else rm -f ".deps/function.Tpo"; exit 1; \
fi
gcc32 -g -O2 -o dmake infer.o make.o stat.o expand.o dmstring.o
hash.o dag.o
dmake.o path.o imacs.o sysintf.o parse.o getinp.o quit.o state.o
dmdump.o macpa
rse.o rulparse.o percent.o function.o unix/libunix.a
gmake[2]: Leaving directory
`/data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1/work/OOo_1.1.3
rc/dmake'
gmake[1]: Leaving directory
`/data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1/work/OOo_1.1.3_s
rc/dmake'
dmake has been successfully built
>
> Do you still have the work directory around? If so, can you look under
> /data/ports/editors/openoffice-1.1/work/OOo_1.1.3_src/instsetoo/ to see
> what is missing?
Yes. There are the following folders in .../instsettoo:
CVS
prj
util
No ".../instsettoo/*.pro/01/normal/".
>
>
> It looks like there is a problem on the next line of the Makefile,
> though.
>
> do-install:
> .if !defined(DISPLAY)
> #
> # UGLY hack to not have to specify a X-Display.
> #
> ${X11BASE}/bin/Xvfb :1001 -screen 0 800x600x24 > /dev/null 2>&1 & ${ECHO
> } $$! > ${WRKDIR}/.Xvfb.pid
> @sleep 5
> @cd ${WRKSRC}/instsetoo/*.pro/${LANG_EXT}/normal/ ; \
> ===> SAL_IGNOREXERRORS=1 TEMP=${WRKDIR} DISPLAY=${DISPLAY} ./install --prefix
> =${PREFIX}
> @-${CAT} ${WRKDIR}/.Xvfb.pid | ${XARGS} kill
> @${RM} -f ${WRKDIR}/.Xvfb.pid
>
> I think "DISPLAY=${DISPLAY}" is incorrect because DISPLAY is not
> defined. Judging by another place in the Makefile where Xvfb is used, I
> think this should be "DISPLAY=${DISPLAYHACK}".
>
>
I can see what you mean, but I'm absolutely not enough in such
"Makefile-things". I've just changed it and building OOo again. But
it'll take an hour. I'll tell (tomorrow).
But, what is obvious, that the end of OOo buildings looks so different!?
Thanks very much,
Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4177F54C.20508>