Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 166157
Missing HelixPlayer and openoffice.org sub-packages in x86_64 distro
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:12 EST
Is it intentional that HelixPlayer is not included in the x86_64 devel tree?
How about the following OOo sub-packages:
HelixPlayer doesn't build on x86_64, so, yes.
pyuno can't work, it requires a 32-bit python. emailmerge requires pyuno, ergo...
What's OOo-base for?
The langpacks need fixed, yes.
Couldn't the 32-bit HelixPlayer be included, if the 64-bit one doesn't build?
"ooo-base" is the openoffice.org hsqldb database access-like front-end, this
subpackage is a bit of a fake as it's only .desktop files and menu integration
because the database is always actually required, but both our UI guys and
upstream want it to look seperateable installable to not confuse
This still applies to current development tree, but the OOo files missing in the
x86_64 distro are now different. Here's a list:
It's the langpacks absence that I'm most concerned with, as I understand the
others are intentionally left out (except for -base; I can't tell from the
previous comment why one wouldn't want it on x86_64)
I believe the langpacks are done now, pyuno and emailmerge won't be done as they
require a 32bit python.
Well, for updates it requires tweaking the update system. For the devel tree and
core releases, it requires tweaking the comps file. Yes, this is a mess.
langpacks and base are still missing from the x86_64 tree in today's development
Can this bug be restated as "x86_64 specific OOo packages are not available?" I
notice in FC4 updates for x86_64 that all the OOo packages are i386
architecture. That is a bug, correct?
No, this is not about OOo packages being 32-bit on AMD64, this is about some of
the translations and other sub-packages not being listed in the comps files,
which would get them distributed as part of the AMD64 distribution. It would be
nice if this error was fixed in time for FC5test1.
Done, should show up tomorrow.
OOo translations and base are in today's x86_64 compose, confirmed. HelixPlayer
is still missing, though. Is that on purpose?
Aha, dug out the reason. Helix is x86 only because it pulls in browser packages
for i386 if it is installed multilib. Hence, Helix is WONTFIX, but closing as
RAWHIDE for the OO.o stuff.