Solved OpenOffice-4 build: "error 65280 ... making ... openoffice-4/work/aoo-4.1.1/main/odk/pack/gendocu"

Jay F. Shachter

Jay F. Shachter

As indicated in the title, I am unable to build editors/openoffice-4.
The build fails with the message:
Code: 
1 module(s): 
    odk
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /m5/build/openoffice-4/work/aoo-4.1.1/main/odk/pack/gendocu

In case it matters:
Code: 
root@m5:/m5/build/openoffice-4 # uname -a
FreeBSD m5 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #0 r284969: Tue Jun 30 22:05:35 UTC 2015     root@releng2.nyi.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC  amd64

Has anyone encountered and solved this problem? If not, how do I diagnose it?

Thank you in advance for any and all replies.

Jay F. Shachter
jay at m5 dot chicago dot il dot us
 
I have encountered in the past many issues with Openoffice at various stages. Moreover, internationalization is a joke. When I build in French only the half of the interface is translated.

I would advise you to definitively drop Openoffice, switch to Libreoffice and install the wanted language packages. In my opinion the Libreoffice project is far more dynamic. The FreeBSD port has just switched some weeks ago to the "evolution" build which is a kind of good "beta".
 
I'll tell you what I did to build editors/openoffice-4 successfully,
but you aren't going to like it.

A couple of private e-mails (they were not posted to this thread) advised me
to fix the patch command in work/aoo-4.1.1/main/od/gendocu/makefile.mk
by putting a cd before and after it, because patch can no longer
patch files in a different directory (loss of functionality is generally not how programs
evolve, but in this case the older versions of patch apparently have certain
functionality that the newer version lacks). I did modify the makefile in the suggested
manner, and editors/openoffice-4 still failed to build. If the attempt to
patch an index.html file in a different directory was causing the
build to fail, it was not the only reason why the build was failing.

Eventually I determined that the javadoc program that produced the index.html
in the first place was failing. I do not know why this would not have been noticed by the
people in the FreeBSD project who had (presumably) successfully built editors/openoffice-4,
but I think it must have something to do with the fact that I configured my system so that
Version 8 java is the default java, since that is the only change I made to the default,
post-installation, java subsystem on my computer. And perhaps building editors/openoffice-4
had not been tested with Version 8 java. It seems implausible (again) that the later version
of a program is unable to do something that an earlier version can do, but at present
this is my only explanation for the observed data.

So I just commented out the javadoc invocation in work/aoo-4.1.1/main/od/gendocu/makefile.mk
by putting a colon in front of $(JAVADOC). At this point the build was failing only because
work/aoo-4.1.1/main/odk/unxfbsdx.pro/bin/odkcommon/docs/java/ref/index.html
was not being created, and the build process requires that file to exist. I fixed that problem
by creating the file manually, in the crudest possible way, I just did a cat on all the files
in work/aoo-4.1.1/main/odk/unxfbsdx.pro/bin/odkcommon/docs/java/ref/index-files,
redirecting the output to index.html in the parent directory.

As I stated, you aren't going to like what I did. But it allowed me to build editors/openoffice-4
successfully, and install it on my system. If anyone wants to post another procedure
for getting the build to succeed, I am eager to learn about it.
 
editors/libreoffice was already working, I had no problem building it (other than the time it took to do so). I wanted editors/openoffice-4 also, sometimes when there are two programs with similar functionality you want them both. It's the same reason why I built both print/gv and graphics/atril. There may be files that are readable by one program but not the other, or one program may have more features than the other but also takes more time to start, so you don't use it when you want to look at something quickly. Both libreoffice and openoffice are now working on my system, and I have moved on to fry fatter fish. I don't see a mechanism on this forum for marking a thread as "solved" (other than by editing the title to append the word "solved" to it, which I cannot do due to title-length constraints) but in my opinion this thread should be so considered.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jay F. Shachter said:
Editors/libreoffice was already working, I had no problem building it (other than the time it took to do so). I wanted editors/openoffice-4 also, sometimes when there are two programs with similar functionality you want them both. It's the same reason why I built both print/gv and graphics/atril. There may be files that are readable by one program but not the other, or one program may have more features than the other but also takes more time to start, so you don't use it when you want to look at something quickly. Both libreoffice and openoffice are now working on my system, and I have moved on to fry fatter fish. I don't see a mechanism on this forum for marking a thread as "solved" (other than by editing the title to append the word "solved" to it, which I cannot do due to title-length constraints) but in my opinion this thread should be so considered.
Click to expand...
Sure, certainly nothing wrong with that. :)

You can mark the thread with the solved prefix by clicking on "Thread Tools" on the upper right while viewing the thread, then clicking on "Edit Thread" in the drop down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top