Hi! Please find attached ebuild soikko-oo-linux-0.2.ebuild. Soikko is a finnish hyphenator for openoffice-bin. It doesn't work with gcc3.2 compiled openoffice but works with openoffice-bin so I guess it requires that openoffice is compiled with gcc3.1. Soikko can also be used with many programs that only use ispell. For example koffice, kmail, emacs etc. Ispell support however requires tmispell library and here's an ebuild for it (I submitted earlier): http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17040 I suggest app-office/soikko-oo-linux Petrus Pietil
Hi! Please find attached ebuild soikko-oo-linux-0.2.ebuild. Soikko is a finnish hyphenator for openoffice-bin. It doesn't work with gcc3.2 compiled openoffice but works with openoffice-bin so I guess it requires that openoffice is compiled with gcc3.1. Soikko can also be used with many programs that only use ispell. For example koffice, kmail, emacs etc. Ispell support however requires tmispell library and here's an ebuild for it (I submitted earlier): http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17040 I suggest app-office/soikko-oo-linux Petrus Pietilä Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
Created attachment 9252 [details] soikko-oo-linux-0.2.ebuild
Created attachment 12548 [details] Better version of soikko ebuild
Could you provide me with a translation of the documentation files into a language I can read (English, Dutch, German) as the website and documentation are in Finnish only. I also suppose there is a reason that the standard openoffice spelling libraries can not be used. Further some technical points. The LICENSE environment variable should not contain freeform text but only the filenames of specific license files in the /usr/portage/licenses dir, separated by a "|". Also do NOT set the A variable, as this is autoset. Next registration of the modules is problematic. The modules should be unregisted when soikko is unmerged. Also the probably need to be reregistered when a new openoffice version is installed.
Created attachment 13529 [details] English documentation for soikko A quick translation of soikko's asenna.txt(install.txt in english). Contain's mistakes.
OpenOffice's standard libraries doesn't contain finnish support and soikko is a binary only program so I don't expect soikko to be integrated to OpenOffice. I made changes to the ebuild as you suggested but /usr/portage/licenses doesn't contain soikko's license. Maybe it's enough if license contains SISSL-1.1 and soikkos's license would be displayed during the unpack ass it does now. The registration is problematic and especially unregistration and I don't know how should I deal with it.
Created attachment 13530 [details] soikko-0.2.ebuild
I know that the soikko license is not in the tree, but I will add it with the ebuild. I found the license in the tarbal, so you don't need to attach it.
Created attachment 44789 [details] ebuild for soikko 0.2.1 - New version for OpenOffice.org 1.1.x - Moved module registering to pkg_postinst() - Added pkg_prerm() to revoke registered modules before uninstall
Tmispell is not required. Soikko's purpose is to add Finnish spell checking and hyphenation to OpenOffice.org and tmispell is NOT required to use it in OO.org. Tmispell's purpose is to add ispell interface to Soikko, so it could also be used with applications that use ispell for spelling. My point: Soikko is ready for official portage tree.
There is now finish hyphenation support in OOo provided through the built-in OODict, so won't put this in, especially as it would also result in some problems, only working with OOo or ooo-ximian is one of them. Closing
Hmm... I think that current oo.o does not provide Finnish spell checking, but soikko does -> reopening. If you think I'm incorrect please close.
@Flammie: Please file a bug upstream instead for the missing dictionaries, closing again
I'm quite certain that upstream won't accept closed sourced spell checker (I don't know about OO.o internals, but there's really no sane way that blind word list matching will produce viable for spell checker in Finnish language). But I think it's enough, that people can download needed ebuild here anyways.
@Flammie: Sorry, I think there was a little bit of a misunderstanding on my side, you are now talking about finnish spell checking (while the original bug described soikko as "a finnish hyphenator for openoffice-bin" - which is available through the OOo-Dictionary-install-wizard). So am I right, that there is no free finnish spell checker for OOo? Still there are still some other hurdles with this on, for example, will it work with 2.0? Cause this will be out in a few weeks and there is no point in providing a new package which will be out-of-date soonish.
Ah, yes, I didn't even notice soikko was advertised here as hyphenation only. Soikko is the only free (as in non-commercial) spell checker as far as I know. If I've understood correctly, the soikko itself won't be updated for OO.o 2, but there's some sort of interface kludge available in http://www.lemi.fi/oo2-soikko/ that makes it possible to use soikko in OO.o 2 beta, but I haven't checked how functional/stable it is.
Umm. Reopening, because I've received reports that soikko spellchecking and OO.o2 work with stable OO.o2 as well.
(In reply to comment #16) > Umm. Reopening, because I've received reports that soikko spellchecking and > OO.o2 work with stable OO.o2 as well. Yes, I tested OO2-soikko few minutes ago and it works fine with OOo2-bin. I only had to run command ./install-oo2-soikko and now Soikko is in my OpenOffice's language-options. So it should be easy to create an ebuild to Soikko (I dont know how to do it). There is an uninstalling tool too, just run command ./install-oo2-soikko --uninstall
flammie: Feel free to take that package, if you want it added to portage
I would, but I don't have commit rights to the Portage tree. I can try to patch the attached ebuild though, but not before next week as I'm going away for weekend.
Created attachment 72196 [details] app-office/oo2-soikko/oo2-soikko-1.0.ebuild Here's my try for an ebuild. It mainly consists of a ripped bash script from original install-oo2-soikko, but with fixed unopkg binary (original does find to seek it) and both gcc-3.3 and generic ABIs stuck in the same file (don't know if this is strictly necesary). I have tested this to work against app-office/openoffice-bin-2.0 from the main tree, but not against source version. If the source version installs unopkg binaries to different place than binary package, this needs to be changed in the ebuild (I already have the conditional block in place for this separation). The actual installation abuses postinst to register the uno package from build directory, I don't know if there is a saner way to do this, perhaps someone from oo-team can fix it? Oh, and the package is keyworded -x86 to suggest that I'm not an approved ebuild writer, use /etc/portage/package.keywords to test :-)
Works with the source version, too.
Didn't work here: !!! ERROR: app-office/oo2-soikko-1.0 failed. !!! Function pkg_postinst, Line 106, Exitcode 1 !!! Couldn't register soikko for gcc-3.3 ABI I have sys-devel/gcc-3.3.6 and app-office/openoffice-2.0.0.
Changed COMPONENT33 to: COMPONENT33="${WORKDIR}/${P}gcc3.3/oo2-soikko-Linux_x86-${PV}gcc3.3.uno.pkg" and now it works. :) Has anyone planned making soikko package which uses oo2-soikko/${P}-src.tar.gz? Does it require oo-sdk?
(In reply to comment #23) > Changed COMPONENT33 to: > > COMPONENT33="${WORKDIR}/${P}gcc3.3/oo2-soikko-Linux_x86-${PV}gcc3.3.uno.pkg" > > and now it works. :) Heh, I haven't been careful enough with that then. But at least with that change it should work at least for someone with all four cases it provides, ie. bin and source with 3.3 and other ABI. > Has anyone planned making soikko package which uses > oo2-soikko/${P}-src.tar.gz? Does it require oo-sdk? I did think of using source version, as far as I understand though, it does require the sdk, and I don't have time to check it out more closely. Perhaps someone from oo herd has the knowledge, when they have time?
Created attachment 72988 [details] app-office/oo2-soikko/oo2-soikko-1.0.1.ebuild soikko 1.0.1 version update and support for amd64.
Created attachment 73027 [details] app-office/oo2-soikko/oo2-soikko-1.0.1.ebuild Ebuild for 1.0.1 in comment #25 had same COMPONENT33 problem as before. Also _updating_ from 1.0 to 1.0.1 didn't work, because 1.0's pkg_prerm() unregistered all versions of Soikko after 1.0.1's pkg_postinst() had registered the new one. I changed pkg_prerm() to unregister only the version we're unmerging. And removed unregister section from pkg_postinst(). Is it needed there? And made some other minor changes too.
(In reply to comment #26) > And > removed unregister section from pkg_postinst(). Is it needed there? I'm not sure about that, I only copied it from original install script and left it there to be safe. I supposed that it would clean old soikko installations before initial installation of oo2-soikko in case people had manually installed them, but I don't really know much about it.
I've been thinking the problem of reregistering soikko after updating OpenOffice. As far as I know there isn't a way to do this automatically in soikko's ebuild. One solution could be to run /usr/lib/openoffice/program/unopkg reinstall --shared from pkg_postinst() of openoffice's ebuild. It would reregister other oo packages too, which is maybe wanted behaviour? But I haven't tried this yet since oo takes so long to compile. I'm not very sure if this even could work, because emerge will clean some files when updating oo and maybe it removes soikko's files from oo base directory too. Any thoughts? Should we ask if this could be added to oo's ebuild?
(In reply to comment #28) > > I'm not very sure if this even could work, because emerge will clean some > files when updating oo and maybe it removes soikko's files from oo base > directory too. > emerge will only clean unmodified files installed by openoffice itself > > Any thoughts? Should we ask if this could be added to oo's ebuild? > For example the gstreamer plugins reregister themselves every time emerge is run on one of the ebuilds using the eclass in question so this should be accepted behaviour but of course we should try to avoid it if possible. A couple of comments about the latest ebuild to improve your ebuild writing skills: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/docs/mw-faq/header.txt check_ooo_not_running() I think this function should be renamed to pkg_setup and not run in src_unpack src_unpack() { If the user wants to see the license, he should read the one in /usr/portage/licenses if [ "${ARCH}" = "amd64" ] then UNOPKG="/usr/lib32/openoffice/program/unopkg" else UNOPKG="/usr/lib/openoffice/program/unopkg" fi There is ${get_libdir} for this
(In reply to comment #29) > A couple of comments about the latest ebuild to improve your ebuild writing skills: > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/docs/mw-faq/header.txt Since my version is just a modification of attachment 72988 [details], I can't add the license. My modifications of course are under GPL-2. > check_ooo_not_running() > I think this function should be renamed to pkg_setup and not run in src_unpack Yep. pkg_setup is the right place for this. Another problem (why I made it a function in first place) is that we should be sure oo is not running while registering the component, but then it's already too late to cancel the installation, because files are already merged. So my hack was to call it twice, before doing anything and just before registering. Of course some kind of locking (so oo couldn't be started meanwhile) would be a better solution, but I don't know how to do that. > src_unpack() { > If the user wants to see the license, he should read the one in > /usr/portage/licenses > > if [ "${ARCH}" = "amd64" ] > then > UNOPKG="/usr/lib32/openoffice/program/unopkg" ... These are not my changes. And thanks for constructive comments.
As we are now changing over to use our own myspell-ebuilds, what about myspell-fi as an alternative? http://packages.ubuntulinux.org/breezy/text/myspell-fi Or is this not sufficient?
From what I've found by googling and polling opinions, it isn't very high quality. If I understood correctly, myspell can't handle wordform generation other than concatenation, so it would be nearly useless for Finnish, I'm afraid. But I don't know if the situation has improved or something, it could be worth of testing at least.
There is work being done to create a free (as in GPL) spellchecker for Finnish, "voikko". From http://www.hunspell-fi.org/index.php: "Hunspell-fi is a project to create a spellchecker and hyphenator for Finnish language. Originally we were using Hunspell as the basis of our work, which explains the name of this project. At the moment the work on Hunspell has been put on hold because a better implementation has become available." I haven't tried voikko yet, but judging from their status-page, voikko is actively developed, still in a prerelease state, but usable (for OO.o and tmispell) and in need of testers. This is probably the first ever free Finnish spellchecker -- wordlists for spellcheckers made for non-agglutinative languages (aspell, ispell) are generally useless for Finnish. Anyway, if voikko works and continues to develop, there shouldn't be need for soikko anymore. Volunteers for creating a portage overlay for voikko are welcome. It would certainly be great to be able to spellcheck one's native language without installing binary blobs.
(In reply to comment #33) > There is work being done to create a free (as in GPL) spellchecker for Finnish, > "voikko". > Volunteers for creating a portage overlay for voikko are > welcome. I'm already on to this. There's a preliminary unreleased secret hidden set of packages in <http://www.hunspell-fi.org/gentoo/>, but current version has not been tested more than once, and it is bound to contain bugs and errors (so, you are free to test it, but currently no support for b0rkage of any kind ;-). I won't give installation instructions yet, because this is a low quality pre-alpha, but after I've tested it, I'll be filing and reopening related bugs.
As there is now an ebuild for voikko in bug #140031, I'm closing this
Finnish bugs to betelgeuse, as requested in bug 60374 comment 14