Discussion:
AOO 4.1.6-RC1 m1 r1844555
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-22 13:12:46 UTC
Permalink
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555

Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Peter Kovacs
2018-10-23 03:03:31 UTC
Permalink
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?

If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would like
to do some signing.

Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-23 10:03:08 UTC
Permalink
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would like
to do some signing.
Now I am a bit confused. The last commit in 4.1.6 was r1844436:
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436

I can start a new build, will this be a RC?

And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)

Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-23 11:06:11 UTC
Permalink
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.

FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would like
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-23 11:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
Post by Jim Jagielski
FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
My build is also running (r1844436), just in case. ;-)

Regards,

Matthias
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would like
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter kovacs
2018-10-23 11:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Important is we build with the same revision.
Are all builds now with r1844436?

Great if I do not have to sign anything. I gladly delegate that to the builders. ;-)
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
Post by Jim Jagielski
FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
My build is also running (r1844436), just in case. ;-)
Regards,
Matthias
Post by Jim Jagielski
On Oct 23, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would
like
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of
HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
Post by Jim Jagielski
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-23 11:24:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter kovacs
Important is we build with the same revision.
Are all builds now with r1844436?
Revision 1844436 confirmed for Windows.
Post by Peter kovacs
Great if I do not have to sign anything. I gladly delegate that to the builders. ;-)
The release manager builds the source build (after the final release)
and signs it...
So you have some time left... ;-)

Matthias
Post by Peter kovacs
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
Post by Jim Jagielski
FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
My build is also running (r1844436), just in case. ;-)
Regards,
Matthias
Post by Jim Jagielski
On Oct 23, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would
like
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of
HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
Post by Jim Jagielski
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-27 12:03:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter kovacs
Important is we build with the same revision.
Are all builds now with r1844436?
Revision 1844436 confirmed for Windows.
Post by Peter kovacs
Great if I do not have to sign anything. I gladly delegate that to the builders. ;-)
The release manager builds the source build (after the final release)
and signs it...
So you have some time left... ;-)
I stand corrected, the source build has to be done with every Release
Candidate... ;-)

Matthias
Post by Matthias Seidel
Matthias
Post by Peter kovacs
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
Post by Jim Jagielski
FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
My build is also running (r1844436), just in case. ;-)
Regards,
Matthias
Post by Jim Jagielski
On Oct 23, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would
like
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of
HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
Post by Jim Jagielski
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-23 11:27:04 UTC
Permalink
Yes.
Post by Peter kovacs
Important is we build with the same revision.
Are all builds now with r1844436?
Great if I do not have to sign anything. I gladly delegate that to the builders. ;-)
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
Post by Jim Jagielski
FWIW, my macOS builds of RC1 are ready... CentOS5-64 are in progress.
My build is also running (r1844436), just in case. ;-)
Regards,
Matthias
Post by Jim Jagielski
On Oct 23, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Matthias Seidel
Hi Peter,
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
If r1844555 has not been build yet, then please start. :) I would
like
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
to do some signing.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1844436
I can start a new build, will this be a RC?
And builds are signed by those who do the builds. ;-)
Matthias
Post by Peter Kovacs
Thank you all for your efforts!
Post by Jim Jagielski
I am ready to start building macOS and Linux 64&32bit builds of
HEAD of AOO416, which is m1 at r1844555
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Peter Kovacs
Post by Jim Jagielski
Just say the word :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Andrea Pescetti
2018-10-25 21:42:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
This has always been an issue to the structure of our SVN repository,
but fortunately it is only cosmetic.

All the ASF projects use the same SVN repository, and the revision
number increases (obviously) any time someone commits to any part of the
repository. So a commit to another project will increase the overall
revision number while the OpenOffice code remains the same.

This means there is always a range of SVN HEAD revisions that correspond
to the same OpenOffice code. Only running "svn log" in the OpenOffice
checkout will tell you the last "real" OpenOffice revision.

I think we used to have a double numbering, like "revision 1844555
corresponding to openoffice revision 1844436"... but this only made it
more confusing!

Regards,
Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-25 21:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Hi Andrea,
Post by Andrea Pescetti
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
This has always been an issue to the structure of our SVN repository,
but fortunately it is only cosmetic.
All the ASF projects use the same SVN repository, and the revision
number increases (obviously) any time someone commits to any part of
the repository. So a commit to another project will increase the
overall revision number while the OpenOffice code remains the same.
This means there is always a range of SVN HEAD revisions that
correspond to the same OpenOffice code. Only running "svn log" in the
OpenOffice checkout will tell you the last "real" OpenOffice revision.
"svn info" gives you both revisions. At least that's what I am using.

---
$ svn info
Pfad: .
Wurzelpfad der Arbeitskopie: /cygdrive/c/Source/aoo-416
URL: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO416
Relative URL: ^/openoffice/branches/AOO416
Basis des Projektarchivs: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf
UUID des Projektarchivs: 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
Revision: 1844630
Knotentyp: Verzeichnis
Plan: normal
Letzter Autor: mseidel
Letzte geÀnderte Rev: 1844436
Letztes Änderungsdatum: 2018-10-20 23:55:27 +0200 (Sa, 20. Okt 2018)
---
Post by Andrea Pescetti
I think we used to have a double numbering, like "revision 1844555
corresponding to openoffice revision 1844436"... but this only made it
more confusing!
We have this double numbering in some builds from our buildbots and it
still confuses people... ;-)

Regards,

   Matthias
Post by Andrea Pescetti
Regards,
  Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus
2018-10-25 21:56:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrea Pescetti
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
This has always been an issue to the structure of our SVN repository,
but fortunately it is only cosmetic.
All the ASF projects use the same SVN repository, and the revision
number increases (obviously) any time someone commits to any part of the
repository. So a commit to another project will increase the overall
revision number while the OpenOffice code remains the same.
This means there is always a range of SVN HEAD revisions that correspond
to the same OpenOffice code. Only running "svn log" in the OpenOffice
checkout will tell you the last "real" OpenOffice revision.
isn't this the reason (or one of some) that we put a SVN tag to a
specific revision, so that all can talk about the same revision for a
specific release?

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-26 14:56:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi Marcus,
Post by Marcus
Post by Andrea Pescetti
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
This has always been an issue to the structure of our SVN repository,
but fortunately it is only cosmetic.
All the ASF projects use the same SVN repository, and the revision
number increases (obviously) any time someone commits to any part of
the repository. So a commit to another project will increase the
overall revision number while the OpenOffice code remains the same.
This means there is always a range of SVN HEAD revisions that
correspond to the same OpenOffice code. Only running "svn log" in the
OpenOffice checkout will tell you the last "real" OpenOffice revision.
isn't this the reason (or one of some) that we put a SVN tag to a
specific revision, so that all can talk about the same revision for a
specific release?
Yes, we tag the final release to "document" that specific revision.

This was more about clear communicating:

 - when a Release Candidate is to be build
 - and what revision it is exactly based on

Earlier builds/releases were done by one Release Manager only, but now
we are a team of three.
That needs some kind of coordination.

Matthias
Post by Marcus
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-26 15:08:00 UTC
Permalink
I went ahead and tagged AOO-4.1.6RC1. If it passes then we can copy that tag to the GA.
Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Marcus,
Post by Marcus
Post by Andrea Pescetti
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Jim Jagielski
r1844555 was the SVN version of HEAD at the time of the email.
Yes, and it increases by the time of writing...
So it gives no information about what revision the RC should be build upon?
This has always been an issue to the structure of our SVN repository,
but fortunately it is only cosmetic.
All the ASF projects use the same SVN repository, and the revision
number increases (obviously) any time someone commits to any part of
the repository. So a commit to another project will increase the
overall revision number while the OpenOffice code remains the same.
This means there is always a range of SVN HEAD revisions that
correspond to the same OpenOffice code. Only running "svn log" in the
OpenOffice checkout will tell you the last "real" OpenOffice revision.
isn't this the reason (or one of some) that we put a SVN tag to a
specific revision, so that all can talk about the same revision for a
specific release?
Yes, we tag the final release to "document" that specific revision.
- when a Release Candidate is to be build
- and what revision it is exactly based on
Earlier builds/releases were done by one Release Manager only, but now
we are a team of three.
That needs some kind of coordination.
Matthias
Post by Marcus
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Pescetti
2018-10-26 18:16:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Jagielski
I went ahead and tagged AOO-4.1.6RC1. If it passes then we can copy that tag to the GA.
We don't tag RCs normally, only releases (and we thus do it AFTER the
vote has passed). No problem, it just means that if the vote passes the
tag will be renamed (moved instead of copied).

Regards,
Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-26 18:55:33 UTC
Permalink
It is most likely better if we start tagging RCs. Anytime we need to "record" some version, a tag make sense, IMO.
Post by Jim Jagielski
I went ahead and tagged AOO-4.1.6RC1. If it passes then we can copy that tag to the GA.
We don't tag RCs normally, only releases (and we thus do it AFTER the vote has passed). No problem, it just means that if the vote passes the tag will be renamed (moved instead of copied).
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 18:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is. This addresses a bunch of CVEs.

I'm not too worried about the fix for building ODK with Java 8
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127876 which also got backed
out, but the java detection problem is present in AOO416 even without
this fix. I haven't had time to take a deeper look. The only critical
issue is that the release build has to be done with Java 7 (Windows
only?).

In addition the bundled version of nss has a bunch of CVEs. Even the
version in trunk has two I believe. I spent most of a week trying to
upgrade the trunk version and got a successful build on Windows, but
haven't had time to test it, and my patches need further cleanup. The
big problems is that newer versions are C99 which the version of Visual
C++ that we use for the Windows build does not support. I also remember
the pain that we went through to get this working properly when we did
the previous trunk upgrade. It is used for document signing.

Unfortunately my time is extremely limited for the next few weeks.




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-26 19:01:27 UTC
Permalink
Hi Don,
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is. This addresses a bunch of CVEs.
I'm not too worried about the fix for building ODK with Java 8
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127876 which also got backed
out, but the java detection problem is present in AOO416 even without
this fix. I haven't had time to take a deeper look. The only critical
issue is that the release build has to be done with Java 7 (Windows
only?).
In addition the bundled version of nss has a bunch of CVEs. Even the
version in trunk has two I believe. I spent most of a week trying to
upgrade the trunk version and got a successful build on Windows, but
haven't had time to test it, and my patches need further cleanup. The
big problems is that newer versions are C99 which the version of Visual
C++ that we use for the Windows build does not support. I also remember
the pain that we went through to get this working properly when we did
the previous trunk upgrade. It is used for document signing.
Would it help if we use MozillaBuild 3.2 instead of 2.20 to build NSS on
Windows?
(Fixed in trunk, but not in 4.1.6)

Regards,

   Matthias
Post by Don Lewis
Unfortunately my time is extremely limited for the next few weeks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 19:09:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Seidel
Hi Don,
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Peter Kovacs
I am a bit confused where we all are now. I think all Issues are
resolved and currently we are not aware on regressions right?
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is. This addresses a bunch of CVEs.
I'm not too worried about the fix for building ODK with Java 8
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127876 which also got backed
out, but the java detection problem is present in AOO416 even without
this fix. I haven't had time to take a deeper look. The only critical
issue is that the release build has to be done with Java 7 (Windows
only?).
In addition the bundled version of nss has a bunch of CVEs. Even the
version in trunk has two I believe. I spent most of a week trying to
upgrade the trunk version and got a successful build on Windows, but
haven't had time to test it, and my patches need further cleanup. The
big problems is that newer versions are C99 which the version of Visual
C++ that we use for the Windows build does not support. I also remember
the pain that we went through to get this working properly when we did
the previous trunk upgrade. It is used for document signing.
Would it help if we use MozillaBuild 3.2 instead of 2.20 to build NSS on
Windows?
(Fixed in trunk, but not in 4.1.6)
I don't think so. Most of the the problems that I ran into were
interleaving variable declarations into the later executable statements
in function bodies. This is a C99 feature that the ancient version of
Visual C++ that we use barfs on. The next most common problem was the
use of <stdint.h>, which is also not supported in that old toolchain.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-26 19:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
I have no idea how to parse the above. All I know is that main/redland in AOO416 builds just fine on macOS...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 19:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
instructions for merging this upgrade back to AOO416 here:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
builds at the configure stage due to shell syntax errors:
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.

The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Jim Jagielski
2018-10-26 19:59:02 UTC
Permalink
Isn't the main issue whether these are blockers or not?
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 20:04:54 UTC
Permalink
raptor 1.4.18 has CVE-2012-0037, otherwise I would not have bothered
with the upgrade.
Post by Jim Jagielski
Isn't the main issue whether these are blockers or not?
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Peter kovacs
2018-10-26 21:51:33 UTC
Permalink
Well it is a bummer we can not fix it with 4.1.6. However this one is 6 year old. It can wait a view month. It is not worth to backport if the same effort can bring 4.2.0 to live.
Post by Don Lewis
raptor 1.4.18 has CVE-2012-0037, otherwise I would not have bothered
with the upgrade.
Post by Jim Jagielski
Isn't the main issue whether these are blockers or not?
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are
needed
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You
committed
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
this change
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so
in my
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand
apply
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on
the
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes
worked on
Post by Jim Jagielski
Post by Don Lewis
Linux and Windows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Jim Jagielski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-26 22:02:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
I am building for Windows at the moment (omitting the changes in
configure.in).

No problems so far...
Post by Don Lewis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 22:10:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
I am building for Windows at the moment (omitting the changes in
configure.in).
No problems so far...
As I previously mentioned, I built and tested that on both Windows and
Linux, specifically CentOS 6. I didn't test CentOS 5 since my VM broke
and it's difficult to set up a new CentOS 5 VM since that release has
been archived.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Matthias Seidel
2018-10-26 22:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
I am building for Windows at the moment (omitting the changes in
configure.in).
No problems so far...
As I previously mentioned, I built and tested that on both Windows and
Linux, specifically CentOS 6. I didn't test CentOS 5 since my VM broke
and it's difficult to set up a new CentOS 5 VM since that release has
been archived.
So macOS remains to be tested...

I am not sure now what caused the buildbots to break, but they all
stopped early in configure.

Regards,

   Matthias
Post by Don Lewis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 22:22:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are needed
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You committed
this change https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so in my
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand apply
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk to
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build on the
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get a
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes worked on
Linux and Windows.
I am building for Windows at the moment (omitting the changes in
configure.in).
No problems so far...
As I previously mentioned, I built and tested that on both Windows and
Linux, specifically CentOS 6. I didn't test CentOS 5 since my VM broke
and it's difficult to set up a new CentOS 5 VM since that release has
been archived.
So macOS remains to be tested...
I am not sure now what caused the buildbots to break, but they all
stopped early in configure.
I think it was the step where the configure.ac changes for the Mac were
manually applied to configure.in. It is unclear whether they are
actually required for the Mac or if they need to be reworked for
configure.in.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Peter kovacs
2018-10-26 22:51:50 UTC
Permalink
Yes I applied them manually. And I took only changes from the version that I thought the change is about.
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
The redland/raptor/rasqal upgrade
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 got backed out.
Someone with a Mac needs to see if the configure.in changes are
needed
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Don Lewis
or if it builds on a Mac as-is.
When we upgraded those in trunk, it broke the Mac build. You
committed
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
this change
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1805089
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
to unbreak things on the Mac, which include some changes to
configure.ac. AOO416 has configure.in instead of configure.ac, so
in my
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127887 I said to hand
apply
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
the configure.ac changes to configure.in. That broke the buildbot
https://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux64-41x/builds/159/steps/configure/logs/stdio
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
so the entire upgrade was backed out of AOO416 with r1843571.
The question is whether we can merge the four commits from trunk
to
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
AOO416 and skip the configure changes and get a successful build
on the
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Mac, or do we need to do some other change to configure.in to get
a
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
successful build. My testing without any configure.in changes
worked on
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Linux and Windows.
I am building for Windows at the moment (omitting the changes in
configure.in).
No problems so far...
As I previously mentioned, I built and tested that on both Windows
and
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
Linux, specifically CentOS 6. I didn't test CentOS 5 since my VM
broke
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
and it's difficult to set up a new CentOS 5 VM since that release
has
Post by Matthias Seidel
Post by Don Lewis
been archived.
So macOS remains to be tested...
I am not sure now what caused the buildbots to break, but they all
stopped early in configure.
I think it was the step where the configure.ac changes for the Mac were
manually applied to configure.in. It is unclear whether they are
actually required for the Mac or if they need to be reworked for
configure.in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Don Lewis
2018-10-26 22:20:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lewis
In addition the bundled version of nss has a bunch of CVEs. Even the
version in trunk has two I believe. I spent most of a week trying to
upgrade the trunk version and got a successful build on Windows, but
haven't had time to test it, and my patches need further cleanup. The
big problems is that newer versions are C99 which the version of Visual
C++ that we use for the Windows build does not support. I also remember
the pain that we went through to get this working properly when we did
the previous trunk upgrade. It is used for document signing.
nss-3.14.4 (in 4.1.5):
CVE-2014-1561
CVE-2014-1560
CVE-2014-1559
CVE-2014-1558
CVE-2014-1557
CVE-2014-1556
CVE-2014-1555
CVE-2014-1552
CVE-2014-1551
CVE-2014-1550
CVE-2014-1549
CVE-2014-1548
CVE-2014-1547
CVE-2014-1544

nss-3.25 (in trunk):
CVE-2017-5462
CVE-2017-5461

Upgrading to 3.25 looks like it would require merging r1753163,
r1753962, maybe r1799750, r1811598, and r1811604. The latter two are Mac
fixes.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-***@openoffice.apache.org
Loading...