On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 @ 7:59am (-0700), Brian de Alwis wrote:

BdA> Is there a reason why our OpenOffice package is for v641 rather than 1.0?
BdA>

I looked into this a bit.  The openoffice project is huge, and the code looks
very cumbersome.  That.s kinda crazy how it requires java to build.  That
said, NetBSD/i386 and NetBSD/Sparc[64] will probably be the only platforms
with a chance to ever have a chance because of JRE support.

According to:

http://porting.openoffice.org/

There is already a port in place for NetBSD/sparc.  However FreeBSD has a
working port of 1.0.1.  I see that there are 121 patches in the
pkgsrc/misc/openoffice pkg for 641 on i386 alone(1).  Wouldn't it make more
sense to start a separate project for NetBSD/i386 at openoffice.org and merge
all the changes into their CVS tree and then have a liaison with them.  It
just seems more conducive to open-source cooperation that way.

Maybe one day java won.t be a requirement and we can get it for other ports.
At least then we won.t be three revisions behind all the time >:}


-lava

1. In $PKGSRCDIR:

find . -name "patches" > /tmp/patchespath; for a in $(cat /tmp/patchespat h);
	do echo -n $a; ls -la $a|wc -l; done | sort -k 2

....making it the pkgsrc pkg w/ the 3rd most patches 8=)

[snip]
./games/xdoom/patches      32
./news/nn/patches      32
./devel/sdcc/patches      33
./graphics/graphviz/patches      33
./mail/sendmail88/patches      33
./editors/emacs/patches      34
./games/ularn/patches      34
./x11/kdebase/patches      36
./graphics/tcm/patches      37
./net/netatalk-umich/patches      38
./news/knews/patches      38
./devel/cmdline/patches      41
./mail/yatsvrs/patches      42
./security/ssh/patches      43
./net/netatalk-asun/patches      44
./x11/lesstif/patches      44
./x11/kdelibs2/patches      56
./x11/kdelibs3/patches      57
./devel/mit-pthreads/patches      59
./net/ppp-mppe/patches      59