gmane.comp.openoffice.devel.tools archive

508 archived articles, newest first (page 2 of 6). Latest articles →

Re: Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:37:56 +0200
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5268
Re: Error on svl modules
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:46:05 +0200
Michael Stahl <[email protected]> • #5267
Re: Re: Error on svl modules
Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:01:19 +0200
Davide Dozza <[email protected]> • #5266
Re: Re: Error on svl modules
Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:28:11 +0200
Hans-Joachim Lankenau - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <[email protected]> • #5265
Re: Error on svl modules
Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:25:31 +0200
Michael Stahl <[email protected]> • #5264
Re: Error on svl modules
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:54:36 +0200
Davide Dozza <[email protected]> • #5263
Error on svl modules
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:53:33 +0200
Davide Dozza <[email protected]> • #5262
Re: Problem building OOo on fetching modules
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:08:03 +0200
Davide Dozza <[email protected]> • #5261
Re: Problem building OOo on fetching modules
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:38:03 +0200
Rene Engelhard <[email protected]> • #5260
Problem building OOo on fetching modules
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:46:11 +0200
Davide Dozza <[email protected]> • #5259
Fontconfig warnings in m81 [was: integration of renaissance2]
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:44:53 +0200
Herbert Duerr <[email protected]> • #5258
Re: Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:34:11 +0200
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5257
Re: Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:00:17 +0200
Eike Rathke <[email protected]> • #5256
Re: Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:41:55 +0200
Philipp Lohmann <[email protected]> • #5255
Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:19:48 -0400
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5254
Re: integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:59:44 +0200
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5253
integration of renaissance2 in m81 broke smoketestoo_native (without X)
Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:48:44 +0200
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5252
Re: Please cleanup project page
Tue, 08 Jun 2010 17:54:40 +0200
Michael Stahl <[email protected]> • #5251
Please cleanup project page
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:43:29 +0200
Eike Rathke <[email protected]> • #5250
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Sun, 6 Jun 2010 11:51:58 +0200
Jan Holesovsky <[email protected]> • #5249
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:53:05 +0200
Björn Michaelsen <[email protected]> • #5248
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:47:02 +0200
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5247
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:04:52 +0200
Jan Holesovsky <[email protected]> • #5246
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:49:53 +0200
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5245
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 17:55:10 +0200
Björn Michaelsen <[email protected]> • #5244
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:28:00 +0200
Jan Holesovsky <[email protected]> • #5243
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:32:14 +0200
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5242
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Mon, 31 May 2010 16:08:05 -0400
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5241
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Mon, 31 May 2010 14:09:05 +0200
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5240
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Mon, 31 May 2010 13:41:51 +0200
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5239
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Fri, 28 May 2010 17:27:37 +0200
Björn Michaelsen <[email protected]> • #5238
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Fri, 28 May 2010 11:24:04 -0400
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5237
Re: cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Fri, 28 May 2010 12:42:01 +0200
Bernd Eilers <[email protected]> • #5236
cws tools: Would a "remote pull" of a given milestone to accelerate cws rebasing be possible
Thu, 27 May 2010 13:12:10 -0400
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5235
New build system
Mon, 10 May 2010 23:20:59 +0200
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5234
Re: The OOo HG and SVN server is down
Thu, 06 May 2010 15:15:29 +0200
"Stefan Taxhet (sonews)" <[email protected]> • #5233
Re: The OOo HG and SVN server is down
Tue, 4 May 2010 17:56:48 -0400
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5232
Re: The OOo HG and SVN server is down
Tue, 04 May 2010 17:15:56 +0200
"Stefan Taxhet (sonews)" <[email protected]> • #5231
Re: is download.services.ooo down ?
Tue, 4 May 2010 09:48:46 +0200
Laurent Godard <[email protected]> • #5230
Re: is download.services.ooo down ?
Tue, 4 May 2010 09:42:32 +0200
Laurent Godard <[email protected]> • #5229
Re: is download.services.ooo down ?
Tue, 04 May 2010 09:36:44 +0200
Mechtilde <[email protected]> • #5228
Re: is download.services.ooo down ?
Tue, 4 May 2010 09:34:55 +0200
"Simon Brouwer" <[email protected]> • #5227
is download.services.ooo down ?
Tue, 4 May 2010 09:05:12 +0200
Laurent Godard <[email protected]> • #5226
The OOo HG and SVN server is down
Mon, 03 May 2010 20:02:43 +0200
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5225
Re: Smoketest fails on RedFlag build bot for CWS nspluginglobal
Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:10:04 +0200
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5224
Re: Smoketest fails on RedFlag build bot for CWS nspluginglobal
Wed, 14 Apr 2010 19:54:41 +0200
"Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany" <[email protected]> • #5223
Smoketest fails on RedFlag build bot for CWS nspluginglobal
Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:59:43 +0200
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5222
Re: move source tarballs out of the scm
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:56:30 +0200
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5221
Re: move source tarballs out of the scm
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:40:40 +0200
Hans-Joachim Lankenau <[email protected]> • #5220
Re: move source tarballs out of the scm
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:29:14 +0200
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5219
Re: move source tarballs out of the scm
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:48:15 +0200
Hans-Joachim Lankenau - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <[email protected]> • #5218
Re: cws created in EIS not exported to tinderbox tag list (SOAP) - "Milestone (created)" empty
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:03:48 +0200
Bernd Eilers <[email protected]> • #5217
Help find broken in OS/2 port
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:03:48 +0200
Yuri Dario <[email protected]> • #5216
Re: Re: [dev-educ] Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:50:54 +0200
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5215
Re: Re: [dev-educ] Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:07:28 +0200
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5214
Re: Re: [dev-educ] Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:28:21 +0200
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5213
Re: Re: [dev-educ] Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:09:28 +0200
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5212
Re: [dev-educ] Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:31:21 +0200
eric <[email protected]> • #5211
Wiki Cleanup: Mission Accomplished (Mostly)
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:27:48 +0200
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5210
Re: cws created in EIS not exported to tinderbox tag list (SOAP) - "Milestone (created)" empty
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:53:50 +0200
Rüdiger Timm <[email protected]> • #5209
cws created in EIS not exported to tinderbox tag list (SOAP) - "Milestone (created)" empty
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 00:00:02 +0100
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5208
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Sun, 21 Mar 2010 10:52:03 +0100
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5207
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:09:50 +0100
Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]> • #5206
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Mon, 8 Mar 2010 19:56:42 +0100
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5205
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:51:34 +0100
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5204
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 17:17:18 +0100
Bernd Eilers <[email protected]> • #5203
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 13:36:54 +0100
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5202
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 11:25:11 +0100
Michael Stahl <[email protected]> • #5201
Re: Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:53:14 +0100
Bernd Eilers <[email protected]> • #5200
Creating a cws from EIS: Not possible to choose state "new"
Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:54:29 +0100
Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> • #5199
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:22:47 +0100
Martin Hollmichel <[email protected]> • #5198
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:45:53 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5197
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:57:47 +0100
Martin Hollmichel <[email protected]> • #5196
Compiler versions used by OOo ports for FreeBSD
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:30:00 +0900 (JST)
Maho NAKATA <[email protected]> • #5195
ANNOUNCEMENT: OOO320 release code line goes Mercurial
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:14:21 +0100
Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[email protected]> • #5194
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:47:46 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5193
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:28:26 +0100
Martin Hollmichel <[email protected]> • #5192
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:01:16 +0100
Martin Hollmichel <[email protected]> • #5191
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:47:30 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5190
Re: Re: Building OpenOffice.org with GNU make
Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:00:38 +0100
Martin Hollmichel <[email protected]> • #5189
Re: New Build System Requirements
Sat, 6 Feb 2010 21:04:21 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5188
Re: New Build System Requirements
Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:39:04 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5187
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 3 Feb 2010 22:48:42 +0100
Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]> • #5186
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:59:48 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5185
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:53:56 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5184
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:59:50 +0100
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5183
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:43:51 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5182
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:38:16 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5181
Re: New Build System Requirements
Wed, 3 Feb 2010 11:14:11 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5180
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 2 Feb 2010 23:49:55 +0100
Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]> • #5179
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 23:34:30 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5178
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:18:49 +0100
Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> • #5177
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:32:58 +0100
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5176
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:21:24 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5175
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 2 Feb 2010 12:08:35 +0100
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5174
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:25:05 +0100
Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> • #5173
Re: New Build System Requirements
Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:05:26 +0200
Jussi Pakkanen <[email protected]> • #5172
Re: New Build System Requirements
Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:34:02 +0100
Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]> • #5171
New Build System Requirements
Mon, 1 Feb 2010 14:14:51 +0100
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5170
New Build System Requirements
Mon, 1 Feb 2010 14:09:02 +0100
bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <[email protected]> • #5169
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.