Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0 users beware!

[Anthony Simonelli]

--- Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 2006-06-23 06:38:32 -0700, Anthony Simonelli
> wrote:
> > I'm sure everyone probably knows this but the
> recent upgrade of
> > libfreetype6 from 2.1.7-2.4 to 2.1.7-2.5 breaks
> OpenOffice.org 2.0
> > if you've installed the downloaded version from
> OpenOffice.org. I
> > installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 using 'alien' to
> convert the RPMs and
> > have been enjoying the great office suite without
> using backports
> > for a while now. Then, after upgrading, I noticed
> the saving feature
> > would crash every time and later found on an
> OpenOffice.org forum
> > that the culprit was libfreetype6. Downgrading to
> the previous
> > version fixes the problem.
> 
> I don't understand. I have libfreetype6 2.2.1-2,
> which is much higher
> than 2.1.7-2.5.
> 
> -- 
> Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web:
> <http://www.vinc17.org/>
> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog:
> <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES
> project at LORIA
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

This pertains only for those running Debian Sarge 3.1
and OpenOffice.org 2.0 from the OOo website.  Anyone
running Unstable/Testing already have a newer version
of libfreetype and OpenOffice.org 2.0 in the
repository.  

Those running Stable only have OpenOffice.org 1.1.4
which does not include Base and many other
improvements such as the Open Document format support.
 That is why I downloaded it from the website and
installed the RPMS via alien rather than using backports.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0 users beware!

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2006-06-23 06:38:32 -0700, Anthony Simonelli wrote:
> I'm sure everyone probably knows this but the recent upgrade of
> libfreetype6 from 2.1.7-2.4 to 2.1.7-2.5 breaks OpenOffice.org 2.0
> if you've installed the downloaded version from OpenOffice.org. I
> installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 using 'alien' to convert the RPMs and
> have been enjoying the great office suite without using backports
> for a while now. Then, after upgrading, I noticed the saving feature
> would crash every time and later found on an OpenOffice.org forum
> that the culprit was libfreetype6. Downgrading to the previous
> version fixes the problem.

I don't understand. I have libfreetype6 2.2.1-2, which is much higher
than 2.1.7-2.5.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

OpenOffice.org 2.0 users beware!

[Anthony Simonelli]

I'm sure everyone probably knows this but the recent upgrade of libfreetype6 
from 2.1.7-2.4 to 2.1.7-2.5 breaks OpenOffice.org 2.0 if you've installed the 
downloaded version from OpenOffice.org.  I installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 using 
'alien' to convert the RPMs and have been enjoying the great office suite 
without using backports for a while now.  Then, after upgrading, I noticed the 
saving feature would crash every time and later found on an OpenOffice.org 
forum that the culprit was libfreetype6.  Downgrading to the previous version 
fixes the problem.
 
 Any ideas as to why and if that will be fixed even though I know that 
OpenOffice.org 2.0 is not a Sarge package?
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0 installed?

[Ephemeral root]

Quoting Bruno Buys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Well, /opt is where the files were written to,
> indeed.  But since dpkg was involved, the managing
> system got in the middle. In the end, I removed all
> the stuff, since apt-get can't do anything else
> besides complain, 'till you remove'em.  Thanks, I'll
> try your suggestion, but, since the OOo package does
> work, isn't it strange that dpkg can't be told to
> forget and leave it as is?  Where is the option
> 'you-know-what-you-are-doing'?

Actually dpkg can be told to mind-your-own-business
with the various --force- options. The problem, if you
can call it that, is with the higher level package
managers like apt-get and aptitude.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2005-10-24 20:42:54 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 02:35:19AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > I see. So, isn't it possible to build a backport statically linked
> > with these libraries?
> 
> It is, but you would have to modify the source package and rebuild it
> yourself in Sid or in a Sid chroot.  I should point out that the
> resulting packages would be absolutely gargantuan.  You would likely be
> better off getting the Sun JVM and downloading and aliening the RPMS
> from their website.

This is possible only for x86 users, though.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2005-10-24 18:57:39 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Except that it is now linked against the libraries from gcc-4.0, g++-4.0
> and gcj-4.0.  Those libraries are not compatible the libraries currently
> in Sarge.

I see. So, isn't it possible to build a backport statically linked
with these libraries?

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 02:35:19AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-24 18:57:39 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > Except that it is now linked against the libraries from gcc-4.0, g++-4.0
> > and gcj-4.0.  Those libraries are not compatible the libraries currently
> > in Sarge.
> 
> I see. So, isn't it possible to build a backport statically linked
> with these libraries?
> 

It is, but you would have to modify the source package and rebuild it
yourself in Sid or in a Sid chroot.  I should point out that the
resulting packages would be absolutely gargantuan.  You would likely be
better off getting the Sun JVM and downloading and aliening the RPMS
from their website.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto


pgpzmz9SikZJi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

OpenOffice.org 2.0 installed?

[Bruno Buys]

I installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 from one of those brazilian mirrors in 
http://www.openoffice.org.br/saite/, where someone already alienized 
them. OOo does run correctly, and I'd like to keep it on my sarge.
Now, apt-get keeps trying to remove it. How do I tell apt-get to forget 
these 'unmet' dependencies?



frank:/home/bruno# apt-get upgrade
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 openoffice.org-calc: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1) but 2.3.2.ds1-22 is 
installed
  Depends: libgcc1 (>= 1:4.0.1) but 1:3.4.3-13 is 
installed
  Depends: libstdc++6 (>= 4.0.2) but it is not 
installed
 openoffice.org-core02: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1) but 2.3.2.ds1-22 is 
installed
Depends: libgcc1 (>= 1:4.0.1) but 1:3.4.3-13 is 
installed
Depends: libstdc++6 (>= 4.0.2) but it is not 
installed
 openoffice.org-core04: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1) but 2.3.2.ds1-22 is 
installed
Depends: libgcc1 (>= 1:4.0.1) but 1:3.4.3-13 is 
installed
Depends: libstdc++6 (>= 4.0.2) but it is not 
installed
 openoffice.org-core04u: Depends: kdelibs4c2 (>= 4:3.4.2-1) but it is 
not installable
 Depends: libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.9.0) but 1.8.0-4 is 
installed
 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1) but 2.3.2.ds1-22 
is installed
 Depends: libgcc1 (>= 1:4.0.1) but 1:3.4.3-13 
is installed


...
and lots of similar lines, you get the idea.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2005-10-24 06:51:27 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:32:18AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2005-10-23 13:36:20 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > > It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
> > > versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.
> > 
> > Why such a dependency?
> 
> Only the gcj in gcc-4.0 can actually build OOo.

But this would be only a build dependency.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:52:36AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-24 06:51:27 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:32:18AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > On 2005-10-23 13:36:20 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > > > It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
> > > > versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.
> > > 
> > > Why such a dependency?
> > 
> > Only the gcj in gcc-4.0 can actually build OOo.
> 
> But this would be only a build dependency.
> 

Except that it is now linked against the libraries from gcc-4.0, g++-4.0
and gcj-4.0.  Those libraries are not compatible the libraries currently
in Sarge.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto


pgpePlc3CsClG.pgp
Description: PGP signature

re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Carl Greco]

Alternatively, you could just download your favorite non-free
JDK (as long as it is Sun's) and OOo from their home page and install it
yourself from the upstream RPMs.

-Roberto

I did this, and it works quite well.  But it took up a huge amount of 
space on my harddrive.


-Mark 


I doubt that the "unofficial" Debian distribution is any smaller.  The 
OOo2.0 distribution takes ~284MB (OOo2.0 shipped with stripped 
executable files) compared to ~219MB for OOo1.1.5 (which was about the 
same for OOo1.1.4) plus the required jre weighing in at ~87MB.  Remember 
2.0 added a database engine to the mix.The openoffice website 
indicates that 2.0 will take 200MB disk space on linux - which was 
somewhat optimistic. 


--
Carl


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Mark Grieveson]

Alternatively, you could just download your favorite non-free
JDK (as long as it is Sun's) and OOo from their home page and install it
yourself from the upstream RPMs.

-Roberto

I did this, and it works quite well.  But it took up a huge amount of 
space on my harddrive.


-Mark


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:02:07PM +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> 
> As a matter of interest why was the kaffe JVM chosen over GIJ?  It seems
> a little strange to have it built with GCJ but then run on kaffe.  I know
> that the configure scripts had problems with GIJ as it does not have a file
> called libjvm.so installed, but that does not seem a good reason.  Is there
> some problem with running under GIJ?
> 
Not sure.  You may want to ask on the Alioth project list for the Debian
OOo developers.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto


pgpRxKmEVRicJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[David Goodenough]

On Monday 24 October 2005 11:51, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:32:18AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2005-10-23 13:36:20 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > > It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on
> > > newer versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in
> > > Etch/Sid.
> >
> > Why such a dependency?
>
> Only the gcj in gcc-4.0 can actually build OOo.  Otherwise, it would
> have to be built with a non-free JDK, which would cause a myriad of
> problems.  Alternatively, you could just download your favorite non-free
> JDK (as long as it is Sun's) and OOo from their home page and install it
> yourself from the upstream RPMs.
>
> -Roberto

As a matter of interest why was the kaffe JVM chosen over GIJ?  It seems
a little strange to have it built with GCJ but then run on kaffe.  I know
that the configure scripts had problems with GIJ as it does not have a file
called libjvm.so installed, but that does not seem a good reason.  Is there
some problem with running under GIJ?

David  


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:32:18AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-23 13:36:20 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
> > versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.
> 
> Why such a dependency?
> 

Only the gcj in gcc-4.0 can actually build OOo.  Otherwise, it would
have to be built with a non-free JDK, which would cause a myriad of
problems.  Alternatively, you could just download your favorite non-free
JDK (as long as it is Sun's) and OOo from their home page and install it
yourself from the upstream RPMs.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto


pgp78aHIXCOSy.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2005-10-23 13:36:20 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
> versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.

Why such a dependency?

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Carl Greco]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 04:37:52PM +0100, Joseph Haig wrote:
 


--- Rick Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
   

> 
> Edit your sources.list file (usually in /etc/apt). Add the following

> line:
> 
> deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x ./
> 
> Once you've done that, run apt-get update followed by

> apt-get install openoffice.org
> 
 



Will this work in Sarge or just Testing/Unstable?

   



It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.

-Roberto

 

OpenOffice 2.0 can however be installed on sarge directly from the 
original openoffice.org  distribution, i.e,  download 
OOo_2.0.0_LinuxIntel_install.tar.gz; gunzip/tar to a file and run alien 
-i from the RPMS subdirectory.  You can also install the menu links from 
the included deb file: openoffice.org-debian-menus_2.0.0-3_all.deb


--
Carl


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 04:37:52PM +0100, Joseph Haig wrote:
> --- Rick Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > Edit your sources.list file (usually in /etc/apt). Add the following
> > line:
> > 
> > deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x ./
> > 
> > Once you've done that, run apt-get update followed by
> > apt-get install openoffice.org
> > 
> 
> Will this work in Sarge or just Testing/Unstable?
> 

It will not work in Sarge as the new OpenOffice packages depend on newer
versions of kaffe and on gcc-4.0, which is only available in Etch/Sid.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto


pgpGfSQw8beIb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Joseph Haig]

--- Rick Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Edit your sources.list file (usually in /etc/apt). Add the following
> line:
> 
> deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x ./
> 
> Once you've done that, run apt-get update followed by
> apt-get install openoffice.org
> 

Will this work in Sarge or just Testing/Unstable?

Thanks,

Joe




___ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! 
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Michael Satterwhite]

Rick Friedman wrote:

On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 11:14 -0500, Michael Satterwhite wrote:


OK, I'll be the first to admit that the problem is with me. Where are
these packages as far as apt is concerned?

I tried apt-get update; apt-get install openoffice.org; It reports that
I already have the latest version.

I tried apt-get install openoffice.org2; it reports I have the latest
version. My version of openoffice.org is 1.9; my version of
openoffice.org2 is the beta. How do I install the official release?



Edit your sources.list file (usually in /etc/apt). Add the following
line:

deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x ./

Once you've done that, run apt-get update followed by
apt-get install openoffice.org


When I do this, I get the following errors:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  libcurl3-dev: Depends: libcurl3-openssl-dev (= 7.15.0-3) but it is 
not going to beinstalled
  openoffice.org: Depends: openoffice.org-core (> 2.0.0) but it is not 
going to be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-writer but it is not going to 
be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-calc but it is not going to 
be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-impress but it is not going 
to be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-draw but it is not going to 
be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-math but it is not going to 
be installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-base but it is not going to 
be installed
  openoffice.org-common: Depends: openoffice.org-core (> 2.0.0) but it 
is not going to be installed
  openoffice.org-dev: Depends: libstlport4.6-dev (>= 4.6.2-3) but it is 
not going tobe installed
  Depends: openoffice.org-core (= 2.0.0-1) but it 
is not going to be installed
  python-uno: Depends: openoffice.org-core (> 2.0.0) but it is not 
going to be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or 
specify a solution)



Note that I tried to install the official Debian package earlier - it 
errors off, too. They're going to get it fixed, of course, and it isn't 
holding me up (there is KOffice, after all), but it would be nice to get 
 the official 2.0 release on my system.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Rick Friedman]

On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 11:14 -0500, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
> OK, I'll be the first to admit that the problem is with me. Where are
> these packages as far as apt is concerned?
> 
> I tried apt-get update; apt-get install openoffice.org; It reports that
> I already have the latest version.
> 
> I tried apt-get install openoffice.org2; it reports I have the latest
> version. My version of openoffice.org is 1.9; my version of
> openoffice.org2 is the beta. How do I install the official release?

Edit your sources.list file (usually in /etc/apt). Add the following
line:

deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x ./

Once you've done that, run apt-get update followed by
apt-get install openoffice.org

Rick
-- 
Rick's Law: What cannot be imagined will be accomplished by a fool.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Michael Satterwhite]

Ron Johnson wrote:
| On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 01:03 -0400, j j wrote:
|
|>Where are the .debs?  Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to
|>convert rpms to deb.
|
|
| http://openoffice.debian.net/
| 2005-10-22: 2.0 uploaded to unstable
| It's done! openoffice.org 2.0.0-1 was just uploaded with target
| unstable. Because it has NEW binary packages again (and was
| renamed back to openoffice.org) it again waits for FTP master
| approval in the NEW queue. For the time they are stuck there
| I've put them onto
| http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x.
|
| Note that those packages will replace the (now obsolete)
| openoffice.org2 packages and the 1.1.x packages completely.
|

OK, I'll be the first to admit that the problem is with me. Where are
these packages as far as apt is concerned?

I tried apt-get update; apt-get install openoffice.org; It reports that
I already have the latest version.

I tried apt-get install openoffice.org2; it reports I have the latest
version. My version of openoffice.org is 1.9; my version of
openoffice.org2 is the beta. How do I install the official release?



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Rick Friedman]

On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 01:26 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> http://openoffice.debian.net/
> 2005-10-22: 2.0 uploaded to unstable
> It's done! openoffice.org 2.0.0-1 was just uploaded with target
> unstable. Because it has NEW binary packages again (and was 
> renamed back to openoffice.org) it again waits for FTP master
> approval in the NEW queue. For the time they are stuck there 
> I've put them onto
> http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x.
> 
> Note that those packages will replace the (now obsolete)
> openoffice.org2 packages and the 1.1.x packages completely.

I've installed these packages and openoffice.org 2.0.0-1 seems to be
working fine with one exception. There seems to be no package for the
openoffice.org 2.0.0-1 help system. Clicking on the Help button (or
Help->OpenOffice.org Help) results in the following error:

The help system could not be started.
The help file for this topic is not installed.

Rick
-- 
Rick's Law: What cannot be imagined will be accomplished by a fool.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Ron Johnson]

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 01:03 -0400, j j wrote:
> Where are the .debs?  Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to
> convert rpms to deb.  

http://openoffice.debian.net/
2005-10-22: 2.0 uploaded to unstable
It's done! openoffice.org 2.0.0-1 was just uploaded with target
unstable. Because it has NEW binary packages again (and was 
renamed back to openoffice.org) it again waits for FTP master
approval in the NEW queue. For the time they are stuck there 
I've put them onto
http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x.

Note that those packages will replace the (now obsolete)
openoffice.org2 packages and the 1.1.x packages completely.

-- 
-
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson, LA USA
PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail.

"But Gates is a visionary. Very early in the history of the PC,
he evolved a strikingly clear concept of where the industry was
headed, and he has pursued that vision_despite many tactical
setbacks_unwaveringly, relentlessly, and ruthlessly."
www.stanford.edu/group/mmdd/SiliconValley/Ferguson/Chapter.5.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Ron Johnson]

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 23:30 +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:31:03PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > > Is openoffice 2 considered to be a different package from openofice 1.14?
> > > Or is it a newer version of the same package?
> > >
> > > -- hendrik
> > 
> > It is quite different.OOo 2.0 is version 2.0, which is the latest.  
> > 1.1.4 
> > has been out for six months or more.
> > 
> > Hal
> 
> I think the question meant ``is openoffice 2 different from OO1, or do
> the packages become separate entities, like gcc-3.3, gcc-3.4
> etc.''. If that is the question, I have just apt-got the OO2 debs from
> http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x/ and they *replace*
> OO1:

The experimental OOo2 conflicts with/replaces OOo1 if you have 
installed the thesaurus.  Otherwise, the 2 can coexist.

Once OOo2 moves to Sid, OOo2 will become OOo and thus replace the
1.1 branch.

-- 
-
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson, LA USA
PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail.

"Pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for
it."
George Orwell, 1941


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Kumar Appaiah]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:31:03PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > Is openoffice 2 considered to be a different package from openofice 1.14?
> > Or is it a newer version of the same package?
> >
> > -- hendrik
> 
> It is quite different.OOo 2.0 is version 2.0, which is the latest.  1.1.4 
> has been out for six months or more.
> 
> Hal

I think the question meant ``is openoffice 2 different from OO1, or do
the packages become separate entities, like gcc-3.3, gcc-3.4
etc.''. If that is the question, I have just apt-got the OO2 debs from
http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x/ and they *replace*
OO1:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache show openoffice.org|head
Package: openoffice.org
Priority: optional
Section: editors
Installed-Size: 200
Maintainer: Debian OpenOffice Team

Architecture: i386
Version: 2.0.0-0.1pre
Replaces: openoffice.org2
Provides: openoffice.org2
Depends: openoffice.org-core (>> 2.0.0), openoffice.org-writer,
openoffice.org-calc, openoffice.org-impress, openoffice.org-draw,
openoffice.org-math, openoffice.org-base

HTH.

Kumar
-- 
Kumar Appaiah,
462, Jamuna Hostel,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai - 600 036


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Hal Vaughan]

On Friday 21 October 2005 01:26 pm, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:02:25PM -0400, Rick Friedman wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:42 -0400, j j wrote:
> > > I thought I overlooked something when I discovered RPMS.  If it worked
> > > soomthly, then I'll be doing the same.
> > > alien -i *.rpm
> > >
> > > Is there a big difference from the last RC?
> >
> > I used alien -i *.rpm on the OpenOffice.org 2.0 RPMs. It worked fine.
> > The RPMs installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 into /opt/openoffice.org2.0. So,
> > if you have SID's openoffice 1.14 installed (as I do), you can still
> > keep it. I intend to keep 1.1.4 on my system until official Debian
> > packages for 2.0 are released. Then, I'll remove the unofficial 2.0
> > packages (and the official 1.1.4 packages).
>
> Is openoffice 2 considered to be a different package from openofice 1.14?
> Or is it a newer version of the same package?
>
> -- hendrik

It is quite different.OOo 2.0 is version 2.0, which is the latest.  1.1.4 
has been out for six months or more.

Hal


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Hendrik Boom]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:02:25PM -0400, Rick Friedman wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:42 -0400, j j wrote:
> > I thought I overlooked something when I discovered RPMS.  If it worked
> > soomthly, then I'll be doing the same.
> > alien -i *.rpm
> > 
> > Is there a big difference from the last RC?
> 
> I used alien -i *.rpm on the OpenOffice.org 2.0 RPMs. It worked fine.
> The RPMs installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 into /opt/openoffice.org2.0. So,
> if you have SID's openoffice 1.14 installed (as I do), you can still
> keep it. I intend to keep 1.1.4 on my system until official Debian
> packages for 2.0 are released. Then, I'll remove the unofficial 2.0
> packages (and the official 1.1.4 packages).

Is openoffice 2 considered to be a different package from openofice 1.14?
Or is it a newer version of the same package?

-- hendrik


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Rick Friedman]

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:42 -0400, j j wrote:
> I thought I overlooked something when I discovered RPMS.  If it worked
> soomthly, then I'll be doing the same.
> alien -i *.rpm
> 
> Is there a big difference from the last RC?

I used alien -i *.rpm on the OpenOffice.org 2.0 RPMs. It worked fine.
The RPMs installed OpenOffice.org 2.0 into /opt/openoffice.org2.0. So,
if you have SID's openoffice 1.14 installed (as I do), you can still
keep it. I intend to keep 1.1.4 on my system until official Debian
packages for 2.0 are released. Then, I'll remove the unofficial 2.0
packages (and the official 1.1.4 packages).

Rick
-- 
Rick's Law: What cannot be imagined will be accomplished by a fool.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[j j]

I thought I overlooked something when I discovered RPMS.  If it worked soomthly, then I'll be doing the same.
alien -i *.rpm

Is there a big difference from the last RC?
On 10/21/05, Jan T. Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:03:31AM -0400, j j wrote:> Where are the .debs? Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert> rpms to deb.FWIW, I've donealien -i *.rpmin the OOo 
2.0 RPMS subdirectory yesterday, and that worked smoothly.Is there anything more sophisticated than one should / could do?I have to say, though, that I was a bit surprised to find RPMs, ratherthan the install script / program with 
1.1.4, in the 2.0.0 archive. Ithought I might have mis-clicked and downloaded a rpm rather than ageneric archive, but on the website [1], I found thatOpenOffice.org 2.0 supports native installation mechanisms. For
example, .MSI and .CAB files are provided on Microsoft Windows;RPM files are available for Linux.Well, as we know, RPM is not "native", but alien to some flavours ofLinux...  ;-)
Best regards, Jan[1] http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/features/2.0/index.html-- +- Jan T. Kim ---+

|
email:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
| | WWW:   http://www.cmp.uea.ac.uk/people/jtk | *-=<  hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans  >=-*--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Jan T. Kim]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:03:31AM -0400, j j wrote:
> Where are the .debs? Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert
> rpms to deb.

FWIW, I've done

alien -i *.rpm

in the OOo 2.0 RPMS subdirectory yesterday, and that worked smoothly.

Is there anything more sophisticated than one should / could do?

I have to say, though, that I was a bit surprised to find RPMs, rather
than the install script / program with 1.1.4, in the 2.0.0 archive. I
thought I might have mis-clicked and downloaded a rpm rather than a
generic archive, but on the website [1], I found that

OpenOffice.org 2.0 supports native installation mechanisms. For
example, .MSI and .CAB files are provided on Microsoft Windows;
RPM files are available for Linux.

Well, as we know, RPM is not "native", but alien to some flavours of
Linux...  ;-)

Best regards, Jan

[1] http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/features/2.0/index.html
-- 
 +- Jan T. Kim ---+
 | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
 | WWW:   http://www.cmp.uea.ac.uk/people/jtk |
 *-=<  hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans  >=-*


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[Noèl Köthe]

Am Freitag, den 21.10.2005, 01:03 -0400 schrieb j j:
> Where are the .debs?  Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to
> convert rpms to deb.  

Try/Test the pre packages

deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.x/ ./

on your sid box and report problems to the debian OOo mailinglist
http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/

-- 
Noèl Köthe 
Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[j j]

Ok :)On 10/21/05, [KS] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
j j wrote:> Where are the .debs? Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert> rpms to deb.>Patience my young apprentice :)--To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[[KS]]

j j wrote:
> Where are the .debs? Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert
> rpms to deb.
> 

Patience my young apprentice :)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OpenOffice.org 2.0

[j j]

I am not sure if that is 2.0.  i think you're pointing to 1.9.xxxOn 10/21/05, Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:On Friday 21 October 2005 01:03 am, you wrote:> Where are the .debs? Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert
> rpms to deb.$apt-cache search openoffice.org...openoffice.org2 - OpenOffice.org Office suite version 2.0openoffice.org2-base - OpenOffice.org office suite - database
openoffice.org2-calc - OpenOffice.org office suite - spreadsheetopenoffice.org2-common - OpenOffice.org office suite architecture independentfilesopenoffice.org2-core - OpenOffice.org office suite architecture dependent
filesopenoffice.org2-dev - OpenOffice.org SDK -- development files...--Michael McIntyre     Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek;  registered Linux user #243621http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/

OpenOffice.org 2.0

[j j]

Where are the .debs?  Oo developers encouraged one to use alien to convert rpms to deb.