Summary: | Add support for evolution-mapi | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | mikopp |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team <gnome> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | anton.bugs, aron, derek.berube, DuPol, dustin, gentoo, ikelos, jlec, korionis, lama, lothendav, marshall.mcmullen, martin, nbowler, nicolasbock, robin, sch000, sejulshah, smparkes, sven.koehler, tsunam, wolf31o2, z23, zappacor |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2008.0 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | 195703, 223821, 565206 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 288249 | ||
Attachments: |
Samba 4 with pidl installation
gnome-extra/evolution-mapi-0.32.2 ebuild Patch to remove unicode flag from folder list function |
Description
mikopp
2009-03-19 07:06:57 UTC
I've been watching this project closely for a while now. Unfortunately in it's current form it's not as usable as plugin using OWA: http://www.go-evolution.org/MAPIProvider/vsOWA R (In reply to comment #1) > I've been watching this project closely for a while now. Unfortunately in it's > current form it's not as usable as plugin using OWA: Yes, but the OWA-Based plugin doesn't work with Exchange 2007 at all. thanks for your interest however this is already present in gnome overlay where we do the development series work and will land in portage when it is ready. Thanks for reporting. Gilles, I've reopened this bug (correct me if I'm wrong), because the only package I could find in the gnome overlay is evolution-exchange (which is the existing exchange interface for evolution, up to exchange 2003 I believe), but isn't evolution-mapi (which supports up to exchange 2007). If it's present there and I've just missed it, could you please paste a link from git.overlays.gentoo.org so we could try it out? If not then its homepage is http://www.go-evolution.org/MAPIProvider, although it already has bugzilla and svn resources on the main gnome infrastructure. The latest version is 0.26.0.1. Looks like evolution-mapi depends on libmapi which in turn depends on Samba 4. Maybe we could make an ebuild that only installs the required shared libraries instead of the whole Samba package. Ok this is indeed not yet in tree. The dependency on samba will depend on how samba guys will split the things up in gentoo. I don't see samba4 ebuilds in tree and I don't plan to take over samba just yet so this might take a while before we actually get it in the tree. Well, does it require samba4 (RDEPEND), or does it simply require the sources to build (DEPEND)? There's nothing stopping anyone from pulling the samba4 source tarball and building a package from it. After all, there's no conflict, since there's no samba4 ebuilds in the tree, and you're not planning on adding any, either. Both, as I understand it. There are libraries from samba4 that libmapi depends on, and evo-mapi depends on libmapi. It doesn't need "samba4" per se; just libraries from it. Good point, I couldn't tell you, I'd need to investigate libmapi a bit more. Hopefully it'll have an autoconf directory and we can just unpack it locally and build from there. I'll look into it, thanks for the idea! 5:) Ugh, so it comes with a "make samba" option, but that will basically download, compile and attempt to install samba into /usr/local/samba. 5:\ The configure check uses pkgconfig to look for dcerpc, ndr and samba-hostconfig. It also checks for the samba/version.h. I don't know enough about samba4 to know whether we could cut down the install to just those elements, but it sounds like it would be messy any way we decided to go with this. Much better would be, well, a) upstream to make a relatively stable release (including sub-packages, the existing packages for libtdb and so forth don't all compile properly, nor interoperate properly), b) for libmapi not to depend on alpha software and c) for us to get a proper idea of how to deal with both samba 3 and samba 4 at once, whether that's via slotting, eselect or some other method. Comments towards this belong in bug 195703. So that's where I've gotten to. I might try building a libmapi/evolution-mapi ebuild pair that work against the most recently submitted samba4 ebuild in bug 195703, but it's unlikely to be soon. I'd far rather an but working install of samba, than a new not-complete one that may or may not give me access to exchange 2007, which I can already get via other means... That's pretty much my take on it too. I don't think we're going to get evo-mapi in any time soon. Hi guys, any estimated release date of an ebuild, even if it's testing/masked one? Yeah, even if it pulled in all of samba-4 as a dependency, it'd be better than nothing at this point. ~1 day after samba 4 is in the tree? (okay, maybe as much as a week...) You don't need samba in the tree. Just pull in a samba4 beta tarball and build a few parts of it like the script included with the libmapi source does. Agaffney, see comment 11 for my attempts at just using samba4 for a few bits and pieces. It turns very ugly very quickly (because basically, libmapi expects you to do an install of its copy of samba4 before you start building it, it can't just be built in a side tree and all installed later). If you can see a way around this, I'm all up for it but I couldn't see a way around it myself other than the options I laid out in that comment... (In reply to comment #11) > give me access to exchange 2007, which I can already get via other means... do you may through an e-mail app or by opening it on a web browser? After all, I'm behind evolution just for the former... Hi guys, any news regarding this subject? samba4_alpha11 just landed in portage tree. I should and libmapi soon, so gnome folks should be able to add evolution-mapi. libmapi is in the tree now. (In reply to comment #20) > so gnome folks should be able to add evolution-mapi. oups, does it mean we should expect no luck under Qt? also requires pidl to work..which is part of samba's tarball.This in not included as part of the install of samba as it stands now in the 4.X ebuild. Created attachment 224065 [details]
Samba 4 with pidl installation
Here's an ebuild that uses the perl eclass to compile and install the required pidl elements. This ebuild and also an evolution-mapi ebuild (which does work) are in my (ikelos) overlay. I probably won't maintain them since whilst it works, it only just works. It had great difficulty maintaining the mail list, and couldn't handle other people's calendars. Closer but probably not worth getting going...
libmapi depends on >=samba-4.0.0_alpha13, which currently is not in portage. configure: WARNING: The Samba4 version installed on your system doesn't meet OpenChange requirements (4.0.0alpha13 or 4.0.0alpha13-GIT-). *** Bug 371629 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Created attachment 277589 [details]
gnome-extra/evolution-mapi-0.32.2 ebuild
Ebuild for evolution-mapi suitable for gnome 2.32
Created attachment 277591 [details, diff]
Patch to remove unicode flag from folder list function
Will this ever become an official ebuild? In "gnome" overlay is an ebuild for 3.16.3. gnome-extra/evolution-ews is not working that good and probably some people might find evolution-mapi to work better for them. Well libmapi-2 is not present in gentoo-x86 and I don't think it is wise for us to add this library since none of devs in the team have access to a server that requires this connector. Now that Samba 4 is officially available in Gentoo, is there anyone who knows enough about this to take another crack at it? I've tried building it myself, but keep ending up with strange combinations of missing libraries or header files. I think I just don't know quite enough about how all the various pieces talk to each other, and I can't find an explanation anywhere of how to pull just the libmapi part out of openchange, so I'm stuck building the entire thing (which, I think, is what's causing a bunch of my trouble.) So libmapi was removed from tree in February 2016 and after looking into how it is packaged, I have no intention to push that under the Gnome umbrella. If someone else wants to do it, I'm fine with it but it really does not seem that upstream thought about actual release material for projects to use this. |