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
