ugly Java dependency in OOo

[Roman Kennke]

Am Sa, den 31.07.2004 schrieb Dmitry Morozovsky um 11:42:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004, Roman Kennke wrote:
> 
> RK> I just wanted to build OOo from ports and found that it depends on the
> RK> FreeBSD native JDK. The problem I see here is, that this requires me to
> RK> agree to the Sun Community Source License, which is indeed a very crazy
> RK> license. I worked around this by just symlinking
> RK> /usr/local/linux-sun-jdk1.4.2 to /usr/local/jdk1.4.2 and it works
> RK> equally well. So why not make the OOo port depends on that JDK? Or even
> RK> better: on the Blackdown-Linux-JDK, so that the user doesn't have to be
> RK> interrupted and required to download an installer?
> RK>
> RK> Of course, I think the best thing would be to leave out these Java
> RK> dependencies altogether. This is what Debian and Fedora people do. They
> RK> have patches for that.
> RK>
> RK> But for now, I propose to change dependencies on jdk14 to
> RK> linux-sun-jdk14, which is no big deal IMO, since building jdk14 also
> RK> requires the linux-jdk.
> 
> Then at least it should be made optional, because _now_ linux-jdk is required
> for building native jdk, not OO, and thus we would break the ability to build
> OO without linux binary compatibility.

yes. This is not what I am worried about. I don't like to agree to the
Sun Community Source License, which is required in order to build the
native JDK. I would rather like to go with linux binary compatibility.

> And, yes, OO dependencies *are* a bit fragile regarding to versions: gcc and
> jdk are only the most visible ones.

Yes, I believe that this is not an easy task.

BTW: I have checked the situation in NetBSD, it seems that they also
have OOo without any Java dependency:

ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/misc/openoffice/README.html

Kind regards,
Roman