--disable-epm

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

--disable-epm

stephan.bergmann
Is anybody using the OOo configure option --disable-epm?  If yes, to
achieve exactly what?  To build no installation sets in insetsetoo_native?

I'm asking because of the following:  To clean up OOo's built-in testing
(see <http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=26189>),
I intent to always build in instsetoo_native an openoffice_en-US in
archive format (in addition to whatever other formats specified by
PKGFORMAT), so that tests that require an OOo installation (like
smoketestoo_native) have one available easily.  If there are scenarios
where no installation sets at all are built in instsetoo_native, I would
have to address that adequately.

-Stephan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: --disable-epm

Rene Engelhard-7
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> Is anybody using the OOo configure option --disable-epm?

Yes. Most of the packagers do.

> If yes, to achieve exactly what?  To build no installation sets in
> insetsetoo_native?

Yes. (And run the installer directly)

Grüße/Regards,

Rene

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: --disable-epm

stephan.bergmann
On 01/07/10 14:46, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>> Is anybody using the OOo configure option --disable-epm?
>
> Yes. Most of the packagers do.
>
>> If yes, to achieve exactly what?  To build no installation sets in
>> insetsetoo_native?
>
> Yes. (And run the installer directly)

I assume that in those scenarios smoketestoo_native is not built (as
there is no installation set to smoke test), right?  We could re-design
this, and even with --disable-epm build an installation set in archive
format in instsetoo_native, so that also in these scenarios
smoketestoo_native could be built (and potentially other tests that
require a full OOo installation could also be executed).  What do people
think?

-Stephan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: --disable-epm

Rene Engelhard-7
Hi,

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:45:59PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> I assume that in those scenarios smoketestoo_native is not built (as  
> there is no installation set to smoke test), right?  We could re-design  

Yep

> this, and even with --disable-epm build an installation set in archive  
> format in instsetoo_native, so that also in these scenarios  
> smoketestoo_native could be built (and potentially other tests that  
> require a full OOo installation could also be executed).  What do people  
> think?

I'd make this optional. (And executable as a separate step). I don't think
we should "waste" the time it needs to build a not-used installset, especially
on slow architectures.

Grüße/Regards,

Rene

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: --disable-epm

stephan.bergmann
On 01/07/10 15:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:45:59PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>> I assume that in those scenarios smoketestoo_native is not built (as  
>> there is no installation set to smoke test), right?  We could re-design  
>
> Yep
>
>> this, and even with --disable-epm build an installation set in archive  
>> format in instsetoo_native, so that also in these scenarios  
>> smoketestoo_native could be built (and potentially other tests that  
>> require a full OOo installation could also be executed).  What do people  
>> think?
>
> I'd make this optional. (And executable as a separate step). I don't think
> we should "waste" the time it needs to build a not-used installset, especially
> on slow architectures.

I'll leave things as they are, then; at least for now.

-Stephan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]