Recommended build instructions ...
Michael Meeks
michael.meeks at collabora.com
Fri Sep 9 14:20:26 UTC 2016
Hi there,
Quick sob-story, my laptop died (RIP), and I urgently needed a new
one at the conference. So I bought a Windows 10 thing - new out of the
box, and took advantage of the situation to read and follow the
instructions from the wiki.
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/BuildingOnWindows
Which recommended lode:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/lode
With remarkably little effort I did an impression of a clueless
newbie ;-) here are my findings; and I believe we should take some swift
action, and get some principles nailed down.
* I was excited about Chocolatey
I read the website, thought 'wow Windows is getting its act
together', then I tried to use it. The downloads complained of not being
signed, I ignored that, but still they refused to work - eventually I
gave up, and moved on to manual installation.
* Recommending a known-good Visual Studio
The LODE page for some reason recommends Visual Studio 2015 - three
times, though there is 2013 in the small print. I was to discover many
hours later that in fact LibreOffice x86 on the libreoffice-5-2 branch
(at least) doesn't compile in this configuration. I was surprised to
find out that this is a well known problem later. We should not be
documenting and recommending a known-problematic configuration to
beginners - even if everyone is rightly excited about moving to the new
compiler =)
=> will propose at the ESC that we recommend to beginners only those
configurations which we know build - ie. have a tinderbox, and CI
support to keep them working all the time.
This is somewhat more problematic, since (apparently) installing
first 2015 and then 2013 results in a truck-load of other odd behaviors,
which are really hard to fix without re-instaling (so the paranoid meme
goes ;-)
* Antivirus
I was broken by McAffe - it broke git - the simple clone failed
with a permissions problem. We have a not-very-explicit "turn off AV"
messaging but not in the LODE (or devcentral) pages, and we should do
that earlier I think; step #1 ;-)
Anyhow - thought I'd provide my feedback; I hope the solutions are
obvious and we can clean this up nicely at least until 2015 is
guarenteed to work by CI etc. =)
HTH,
Michael.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/attachments/20160909/a7cccee2/attachment.html>
More information about the LibreOffice
mailing list