OO.org2

[Thomas Fitzsimmons]

On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 19:45 +0000, Caolan McNamara wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 21:57 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 23:10 +0000, Paul wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > 
>> > > So, it is in a beta candidate release now. The question is, is it going
>> > > to be considered for FC4 or is FC4 going to be 1.1.x?
>> > 
>> > FC4 has slipped from the schedule slightly, so it the chances are that
>> > if OOo2 is released (say) 1st week of April as a release, it stands a
>> > good chance of being in.
>> > 
>> > Of course, I don't work for RH, so could be just speaking out of my
>> > backside on that one.
>> 
>> Caolan has had packages building for quite a while now, and if the damn
>> thing doesn't keep failing to build on PPC, it should be out in Rawhide
>> by early next week.  Last I heard, the release for OOo 2.0 was going to
>> be "April/May", and since FC4 is slated for a June release, chances of
>> OOo 2.0 Final being in FC4 a looking good.
>
>After an astonishing 20 hour build 1.9.81 should materialize soon. There
>are some known non-specific to fedora bugs so searching the
>qa.openoffice.org for your symptoms is likely to explain most problems,
>but feel free to log issues for unreported upstream issues against
>openoffice.org's fedora bugzilla component.
>
>If gcj/java guys want to poke at the java stuff that builds the
>helpcontent2 directory to speed up the slowest build part, that would be
>appreciated :-)
>

Are you building bytecode or native objects?  The rawhide
java-1.4.2-gcj-compat-devel has a fix to make ecj run natively which
speeds up bytecode compilation 2-3 times.  We're planning on
natively-compiling rawhide ant -- that will likely further reduce build
times.

(Just curious: do these new package build against libjawt.so?)

Tom