How are installation sets being built?

Stephan Bergmann sbergman at
Fri Oct 11 01:48:10 PDT 2013

On 10/10/2013 04:12 PM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 10/10/13 09:14, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>> ....which brings me back to my original question for a universal trigger
>> whether or not to produce installation sets during a build.
>> Seeing that --enable-epm currently effectively fulfills that role
>> everywhere but on Windows, one option would be to make it fulfill that
>> role on Windows too.  (I have a local patch to do that.)
>> The alternative would be to introduce an explicit
>> --enable-installation-sets.  Opinions, anyone?
> we already have --with-package-format, much simpler to do nothing if the
> user doesn't specify that than adding another option, or using
> --enable-epm on a plaform where EPM is irrelevant.

Yes, sounds better to tweak --with-package-format into that role than to 
stretch --enable-epm.

So, if there are no complaints coming, I'll change the meaning of 
--with-package-format so that only if --with-package-format=... is 
explicitly specified are installation sets (of the specified kinds) 


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list