| Summary: | wpd2sxw fails to build with libwpd-0.8.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Steev Klimaszewski (RETIRED) <steev> |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Office Team <office> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | avuton, gentoo-bugs2, grobian |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: | ebuild for wpd2sxw-0.7.0 | ||
|
Description
Steev Klimaszewski (RETIRED)
2005-07-30 13:08:27 UTC
and squinky86 is listed as maintainer, but left us OK, I've looked at sf.net/projects/libwpd/ and it appears that wpd2sxw has probably gone through some pretty fundamental changes (along with libwpd-8.*). There is a new version of wpd2sxw seems to have: 1) sources are only distributed in RPM (use rpm2targz) 2) the directory name has changed to writerperfect(?). The binary is still named wpd2sxw, and it builds perfectly with libwpd-0.8.2 It all seems very odd to me but this is how it is. libwpd-0.8.2 should be marked incompatible with wpd2sxw until this situation is hashed out because looking at the sources it's totally incompatible. Here's the URL to save a little bit of time: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=62662&package_id=73612 Created attachment 66348 [details]
ebuild for wpd2sxw-0.7.0
I ran against this problem too, and created an ebuild for wpd2sxw. It appears
the source ball for perfectwriter is nothing more than wpd2sxw, so I used that
one, and all seems to be very happy. I keyworded ~ppc-macos as I tested it and
already keyworded the dependency libwpd and soon libgsf (which I needed this
package for to test)
I've cleaned up the ebuild a bit and added version 0.7.1 to portage now. Had to push wpd2sxwbatch.pl to our distfiles-mirrors, as it seems to be missing from the libwpd-webpage atm. version 0.7.1 works OK, while version 0.6.0-r1 gives the error on libwpd. But version 0.7.1 is still masked (~x86) ? It works like a charm for me, so maybe it's time to mark it stable ? |