Re: Restructuring AOO Build Guide
Hello Peter, Am 26.02.20 um 04:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > Hi Carl, > > There is another Issue where I posted a lot of other assertion errors. > So if you start using OO with debug option enabled it will always pop > some assertion error up without crashing. Is there needed a special build? How can I start the debug mode? Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Apache OpenOffice ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Restructuring AOO Build Guide
Hello, Am 25.02.20 um 18:10 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > Carl Marcum wrote: >> Here are my notes on building AOO 4.2 on Ubuntu 18 LTS 64-bit VM > > In this case you won't need EPM probably. Or do you still need it? We need epm to build deb und rpm. > >> $ time build --all -P2 -- -P2 >> # At 14 hours 2 processes didn't do me that much better. > > Both timings you reported are really strange, maybe there is some bad > virtualization performance. Even for a build without ccache the time > should be closer to 1 hour than to 14 hours. I'd like to investigate > this or at least to double-check on my hardware. in my VM with build --all -P2 -- -P2 I need more than 12 h too. At the sponsored maschine with build --all -P2 -- -P8 it takes a little bit more than 1 h. Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Apache OpenOffice ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Restructuring AOO Build Guide
Hi Carl, --enable-dbgutil Will activate assertion errors. We have a lot of them. The one you have found i started to analyses at https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128272 I know now there is some IDL to look at, but did not pick up the investigation again. If anyone knows something then just write it up will help. There is another Issue where I posted a lot of other assertion errors. So if you start using OO with debug option enabled it will always pop some assertion error up without crashing. Am 25.02.20 um 01:06 schrieb Carl Marcum: Hi Keith, On 2/17/20 5:01 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: In a previous thread (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r4bf950b61077b8fb320de7c257d6ffacbcbf42cd2bdf643c3be7b617%40%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E) it was mentioned that a restructuring of the AOO build Guides would be a good idea. I am starting this thread as a place where people can discuss ideas of what this my look like. For reference the current Build Guide is here: https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO. This should be a wide ranging discussion that leads to clearer instructions to be able to build AOO; especially for new volunteers. Regards Keith N. McKenna Here are my notes on building AOO 4.2 on Ubuntu 18 LTS 64-bit VM Started with a minimal desktop install. Again, If anyone spots unneeded dependencies please let us know. Begin # comments for background info that don't need to be included. # make sure there are no spaces after the backslash if you copy/paste. # I tried to put these in a better order :) # I also used the system ant instead of downloading it like I did with CentOS 7. install dependencies: sudo apt-get install \ ant \ autoconf \ bison \ ccache \ g++ \ gcc \ git \ gperf \ fakeroot \ flex \ junit4 \ libarchive-zip-perl \ libcups2-dev \ libfontconfig1-dev \ libfreetype6-dev \ libgconf2-dev \ libghc-gio-dev \ libgtk2.0-dev \ libgstreamer1.0-0 \ libidl-dev \ liborbit2-dev \ libpam0g-dev \ libssl-dev \ libwww-perl \ libxaw7-dev \ libxml-parser-perl \ libxrandr-dev \ openjdk-8-jdk \ patch # I use a directory /home//sources to store source I download. # update as needed cd ~/sources download dmake, unpack, and change into directory $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/dmake/archive/dmake-4.12.3.tar.gz $ tar xvf dmake-4.12.3.tar.gz $ cd dmake-dmake-4.12.3/ $ pwd /home//sources/dmake-dmake-4.12.3 # I needed to use sudo for the make install so I split these up. build and install dmake $ ./configure --prefix=/usr/local; $ sudo make install change back to ~/sources cd .. download epm, unpack, and change into directory $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/epm/archive/epm-4.4.2.tar.gz $ tar xvf epm-4.4.2.tar.gz $ cd epm-epm-4.4.2 build and install epm $ ./configure --prefix=/usr/local --enable-aoo; $ sudo make install get unowinreg.dll from /aoo/main $ wget -O external/unowinreg/unowinreg.dll https://tools.openoffice.org/unowinreg_prebuild/680/unowinreg.dll configure the build $ autoconf $ ./configure \ --enable-category-b \ --enable-bundled-dictionaries \ --enable-dbgutil \ --with-package-format="installed" \ --with-rat-scan \ --enable-gio \ --disable-gnome-vfs from main $ ./bootstrap $ source LinuxX86-64Env.Set.sh # I used time because I wanted to see how long the build took. # I also use 2 cores this time but that's also all this VM has configured. # so it may be why it didn't make much difference. this is the big moment!! time to build the office... change into the install set directory. $ cd instsetoo_native $ time build --all -P2 -- -P2 *** Successful packaging process! *** copying log file to //aoo/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/Apache_OpenOffice_SDK/installed/install/log/log_AOO450_en-US.log stopping log at Mon Feb 24 08:13:56 2020 Multiprocessing build is finished Maximal number of processes run: 2 real 842m45.535s user 1069m43.491s sys 142m18.526s # At 14 hours 2 processes didn't do me that much better. End Other notes: When I start the office I keep getting this error. If I select No=ignore things seem to keep working. Error: assertion failed! From File /aoo/main/vcl/unx/gtk/a11y/atkwrapper.cxx at Line 874 Abort ? (Yes=abort / No=ignore / Cancel=core dump) Please let me know if you have any questions. Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Unsuccessful test of AOO 4.5 from buildbot output
Just download the 4.5 files (no sdk, just the main application w/en_us ) Did a parallel install on Ubuntu 18.04 KDE/Plasma Install went fine. Ran a couple of largish writer files into it, did a little light editing - no problems. Created a quick small Impress file (no animation) and no problems. Installed Oracle Report Builder extension - ran a couple of example dbs with macro controlled report generation - no problems. Calc; made a quick little spread sheet with a graph, really simple - no problems. Then I opened an .xls file I use for testing calculations performance and ran into a bit of an issue. Compared to 4.1.6 the file required noticeably more time to load compared to 4.1.6 (2 sheets, data sheet has 18,048 rows of data) Forced a recalculation of the full sheet and here version 4.5 was much worse performance wise over the 4.1.6 version. 4.1.6 takes just a tad but less then 4 minutes to finish and 4.5 took over 6 minutes. Anyway, hope that feedback helps. Best wishes, Drew On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 8:22 PM Carl Marcum wrote: > > > On 2/25/20 6:55 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > > Hello all -- > > I just installed the AOO 4.5.0 for Linux-64 from the buildbots > > https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/linux64/ > > > > I'm getting errors (multiple occurrence of each) as follows: > > > > l/ib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.8' not found > > /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.9' not found > > /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.21' not found > > /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.20' not found > > > > Do these reference new library requirements -- I'm on CentOS7 --or are > they > > the result of the differences between the buildbot environment and my > > machine? > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Kay > > > Hi Kay, > > I just installed the en-US RPM's from there and got the same result on > my CentOS 7 VM that I rolled back to before installing all the build > dependencies. > > Best regards, > Carl > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
Re: Unsuccessful test of AOO 4.5 from buildbot output
On 2/25/20 6:55 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hello all -- I just installed the AOO 4.5.0 for Linux-64 from the buildbots https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/linux64/ I'm getting errors (multiple occurrence of each) as follows: l/ib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.8' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.9' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.21' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.20' not found Do these reference new library requirements -- I'm on CentOS7 --or are they the result of the differences between the buildbot environment and my machine? Thanks. Kay Hi Kay, I just installed the en-US RPM's from there and got the same result on my CentOS 7 VM that I rolled back to before installing all the build dependencies. Best regards, Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Unsuccessful test of AOO 4.5 from buildbot output
Hello all -- I just installed the AOO 4.5.0 for Linux-64 from the buildbots https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/linux64/ I'm getting errors (multiple occurrence of each) as follows: l/ib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.8' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.9' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.21' not found /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.20' not found Do these reference new library requirements -- I'm on CentOS7 --or are they the result of the differences between the buildbot environment and my machine? Thanks. Kay
Re: Restructuring AOO Build Guide
On 2/25/20 12:10 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Carl Marcum wrote: Here are my notes on building AOO 4.2 on Ubuntu 18 LTS 64-bit VM Thanks for the efforts (both for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu LTS). Some of the notes below apply to both. Started with a minimal desktop install. Especially as we are in a VM, it would make sense to double-check with a minimal install without even the desktop environment (since one can connect externally). But I guess the dependencies listed below would probably do the right thing in either case. download dmake, unpack, and change into directory I don't see a need for downloading dmake and/or EPM. This is part of the build process. Of course nobody forbids your approach, but for a minimal set of instruction one would just pass the download URLs and everything would be built automatically. $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/dmake/archive/dmake-4.12.3.tar.gz $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/epm/archive/epm-4.4.2.tar.gz $ wget -O external/unowinreg/unowinreg.dll https://tools.openoffice.org/unowinreg_prebuild/680/unowinreg.dll I would replace these three (holds for CentOS 7 too) with files from OOoExtras. I mean, we should rely on the assumption that in order to build OpenOffice we must have online: - The code repository - OOoExtras for all dependencies (thus I would also store unowinreg.dll there and change our default download URL for it) - Extensions if one needs to download/bundle a dictionary We shouldn't depend on packages hosted on Github or on files from tools.openoffice.org. --with-package-format="installed" \ In this case you won't need EPM probably. Or do you still need it? $ time build --all -P2 -- -P2 # At 14 hours 2 processes didn't do me that much better. Both timings you reported are really strange, maybe there is some bad virtualization performance. Even for a build without ccache the time should be closer to 1 hour than to 14 hours. I'd like to investigate this or at least to double-check on my hardware. When I start the office I keep getting this error. If I select No=ignore things seem to keep working. Error: assertion failed! From File /aoo/main/vcl/unx/gtk/a11y/atkwrapper.cxx at Line 874 Abort ? (Yes=abort / No=ignore / Cancel=core dump) Never seen, but for sure this must be fixed. Regards, Andrea. Hi Andrea, Thank you very much for your review. I'll modify my notes and give them another run through. I can also setup a minimal install a give it a try like you suggested. I don't think epm would be needed if I'm not packaging. We could note that somewhere in the instructions. It's quite possible I could have some settings that need changed on my VirtualBox guests to improve performance. I'll look into it. Best regards, Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Windows Installer translation
Hi Pedro, Am 25.02.20 um 13:10 schrieb Pedro Lino: > Hi Matthias > > (Brian in BCC again) > >> On February 25, 2020 11:02 AM Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino: >>> Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder >>> containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some >>> cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers >>> sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a >>> intermediate folder is really unnecessary. >> We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and >> MSVCR100.DLL. > You are right, my bad! They are indeed contained in the redist folder. It has > been so long that I have seen the MSVC launched that I assumed that it is no > longer used. Once these runtimes are installed you will not see them launched again. And msvcr100.dll is copied silently. > > If Windows 10 does not include the needed MSVC libraries (can anyone > confirm?) then unfortunately AOO still needs the initial unpack folder > (although it could be unpacked to a temp folder and deleted after install, as > you mention in > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628#c2 ) Windows 10 does not have these runtimes included. But it remains to be investigated if they can somehow be packed into an MSI? > Since the temp folder is only needed for first install (all msi files are > backed up by Windows) would it be possible to change the default command to > POSTREMOVE=ON ? I can have a look into it. In principle the setup.exe is launched by NSIS, so the command should be somewhere to find. Regards, Matthias > > Regards, > Pedro > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
On 2/25/20 10:06 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi Kay, Am 25.02.20 um 18:28 schrieb Kay Schenk: Hi Matthias, Rory-- My Gnome theme, Adwaita, on CentOS 7 is problematic with some spacing if you want to know the truth. I switched to Adwaita for testing on Ubuntu 20.04 and that reduces some problems with the scroll bars, but not with the sidebar. Just curious on your image -- are you referring to the cramped text under the bullet boxes? The problem is that the boxes are way too big and overlapping. Looks like some vertical scaling is used (also for menu/toolbars). Honestly, it doesn't look all that bad to me. Yet again, different themes/scaling issues I guess. What Gnome version and theme are being used? My Ubuntu 20.04 (pre-release) is at GNOME 3.34.2 and the theme Canonical uses is called "Yaru". Personally, I don't like GNOME (and Yaru) at all, but that is what users installing Ubuntu 20.04 get out of the box. ;-) I understand. I'm not sure how to reconcile the Gnome version and default theme used with the build with what Linux users will see. We should at least provide information on that to them. Things may vary quite a bit from Gnome versions and theme used. Regards, Matthias On 2/25/20 9:18 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi Rory, Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 Matthias Seidel wrote: It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" GNOME theme: https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. Any ideas? Regards, Matthias On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of the various panels is correct. On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are with GNOME, not with XFCE. AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be disappointed. Regards, Matthias -- Rory O'Farrell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
Hi Kay, Am 25.02.20 um 18:28 schrieb Kay Schenk: > Hi Matthias, Rory-- > > My Gnome theme, Adwaita, on CentOS 7 is problematic with some spacing > if you want to know the truth. I switched to Adwaita for testing on Ubuntu 20.04 and that reduces some problems with the scroll bars, but not with the sidebar. > Just curious on your image -- are you referring to the cramped text > under the bullet boxes? The problem is that the boxes are way too big and overlapping. Looks like some vertical scaling is used (also for menu/toolbars). > What Gnome version and theme are being used? My Ubuntu 20.04 (pre-release) is at GNOME 3.34.2 and the theme Canonical uses is called "Yaru". Personally, I don't like GNOME (and Yaru) at all, but that is what users installing Ubuntu 20.04 get out of the box. ;-) Regards, Matthias > > On 2/25/20 9:18 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: >> Hi Rory, >> >> Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: >>> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 >>> Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi all, > > Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the > "new" > GNOME theme: > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png > > Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Matthias >>> On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates >>> (2020-02-25) A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks >>> good - positioning of the various panels is correct. >>> >>> On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) >>> 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. >> Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are >> with GNOME, not with XFCE. >> >> AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS >> version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be >> disappointed. >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >>> -- >>> Rory O'Farrell >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Status of infrabissues
What is the status of our infra stuff? Namly focusing on https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127789 And https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128277 And cms migration? Thanks. All the best Peter -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
Hi Rory, Am 25.02.20 um 18:25 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:18:14 +0100 > Matthias Seidel wrote: > >> Hi Rory, >> >> Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: >>> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 >>> Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi all, > > Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" > GNOME theme: > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png > > Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Matthias >>> On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) >>> A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of >>> the various panels is correct. >>> >>> On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) >>> 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. >> Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are >> with GNOME, not with XFCE. >> >> AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS >> version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be >> disappointed. >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias > It is good to check that a problem is isolated to a particular operating > system, which is why I reported on the two Xubuntu versions. Thanks, I also did that before... That's why I wrote "issues with the "new" GNOME theme" in my original post. Matthias > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
Hi Matthias, Rory-- My Gnome theme, Adwaita, on CentOS 7 is problematic with some spacing if you want to know the truth. Just curious on your image -- are you referring to the cramped text under the bullet boxes? What Gnome version and theme are being used? On 2/25/20 9:18 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi Rory, Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 Matthias Seidel wrote: It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" GNOME theme: https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. Any ideas? Regards, Matthias On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of the various panels is correct. On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are with GNOME, not with XFCE. AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be disappointed. Regards, Matthias -- Rory O'Farrell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:18:14 +0100 Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Rory, > > Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 > > Matthias Seidel wrote: > > > >> It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? > >> > >> Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" > >>> GNOME theme: > >>> > >>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png > >>> > >>> Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. > >>> > >>> Any ideas? > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Matthias > > On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) > > A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of > > the various panels is correct. > > > > On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) > > 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. > > Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are > with GNOME, not with XFCE. > > AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS > version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be > disappointed. > > Regards, > > Matthias It is good to check that a problem is isolated to a particular operating system, which is why I reported on the two Xubuntu versions. -- Rory O'Farrell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
Hi Rory, Am 25.02.20 um 18:11 schrieb Rory O'Farrell: > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 > Matthias Seidel wrote: > >> It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? >> >> Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" >>> GNOME theme: >>> >>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png >>> >>> Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. >>> >>> Any ideas? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias > On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) > A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of the > various panels is correct. > > On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) > 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. Yes, but I am talking about Ubuntu here, not Xubuntu... The problems are with GNOME, not with XFCE. AOO on Ubuntu 18.04 still looks "normal". Ubuntu 20.04 is the next LTS version coming in April, so people upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will be disappointed. Regards, Matthias > > -- > Rory O'Farrell > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:31:43 +0100 Matthias Seidel wrote: > It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? > > Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > > Hi all, > > > > Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" > > GNOME theme: > > > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png > > > > Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Regards, > > > > Matthias On Xubuntu 20.04 (out of the box install) with today's updates (2020-02-25) A00 4.5.0 of 2020-02-16_04:12:23 that sidebar looks good - positioning of the various panels is correct. On Xubuntu 18.04.4 (with today's updates), AOO 420m2(Build:9821) 2020-02-16_12:52:4 that sidebar looks good also. -- Rory O'Farrell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Restructuring AOO Build Guide
Carl Marcum wrote: Here are my notes on building AOO 4.2 on Ubuntu 18 LTS 64-bit VM Thanks for the efforts (both for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu LTS). Some of the notes below apply to both. Started with a minimal desktop install. Especially as we are in a VM, it would make sense to double-check with a minimal install without even the desktop environment (since one can connect externally). But I guess the dependencies listed below would probably do the right thing in either case. download dmake, unpack, and change into directory I don't see a need for downloading dmake and/or EPM. This is part of the build process. Of course nobody forbids your approach, but for a minimal set of instruction one would just pass the download URLs and everything would be built automatically. $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/dmake/archive/dmake-4.12.3.tar.gz $ wget https://github.com/jimjag/epm/archive/epm-4.4.2.tar.gz $ wget -O external/unowinreg/unowinreg.dll https://tools.openoffice.org/unowinreg_prebuild/680/unowinreg.dll I would replace these three (holds for CentOS 7 too) with files from OOoExtras. I mean, we should rely on the assumption that in order to build OpenOffice we must have online: - The code repository - OOoExtras for all dependencies (thus I would also store unowinreg.dll there and change our default download URL for it) - Extensions if one needs to download/bundle a dictionary We shouldn't depend on packages hosted on Github or on files from tools.openoffice.org. --with-package-format="installed" \ In this case you won't need EPM probably. Or do you still need it? $ time build --all -P2 -- -P2 # At 14 hours 2 processes didn't do me that much better. Both timings you reported are really strange, maybe there is some bad virtualization performance. Even for a build without ccache the time should be closer to 1 hour than to 14 hours. I'd like to investigate this or at least to double-check on my hardware. When I start the office I keep getting this error. If I select No=ignore things seem to keep working. Error: assertion failed! From File /aoo/main/vcl/unx/gtk/a11y/atkwrapper.cxx at Line 874 Abort ? (Yes=abort / No=ignore / Cancel=core dump) Never seen, but for sure this must be fixed. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Optical glitches in Ubuntu 20.04
It seems that nobody cares about how ugly AOO will look on Ubuntu 20.04? Am 08.02.20 um 12:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi all, > > Ubuntu 20.04 is coming in April and AOO has some issues with the "new" > GNOME theme: > > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO420-Ubuntu2004.png > > Until Ubuntu 18.04 it looked all right. > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Matthias > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Windows Installer translation
Hi Matthias (Brian in BCC again) > On February 25, 2020 11:02 AM Matthias Seidel > wrote: > Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino: > > Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder > > containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some > > cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers > > sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a > > intermediate folder is really unnecessary. > > We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and > MSVCR100.DLL. You are right, my bad! They are indeed contained in the redist folder. It has been so long that I have seen the MSVC launched that I assumed that it is no longer used. If Windows 10 does not include the needed MSVC libraries (can anyone confirm?) then unfortunately AOO still needs the initial unpack folder (although it could be unpacked to a temp folder and deleted after install, as you mention in https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628#c2 ) Since the temp folder is only needed for first install (all msi files are backed up by Windows) would it be possible to change the default command to POSTREMOVE=ON ? Regards, Pedro - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Errors in bootstrap while building dmake
Am 25.02.20 um 12:04 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > wohoo! > > Not our issue are the best issues! Definitely! See: https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2020-02/msg00228.html Regards, Matthias > > Am 25.02.20 um 12:03 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Hi all, >> >> Just today, there was an update of "binutils" for Cygwin and now the >> errors are gone... ;-) >> >> Sorry for the trouble, I am just doing a new build now! >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >> Am 24.02.20 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Am 24.02.20 um 18:18 schrieb Peter Kovacs: can you post what g++ -v prints on bash? >>> --- >>> $ g++ -v >>> Es werden eingebaute Spezifikationen verwendet. >>> COLLECT_GCC=g++ >>> COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-cygwin/9.2.0/lto-wrapper.exe >>> Ziel: x86_64-pc-cygwin >>> Konfiguriert mit: >>> /cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0/configure >>> --srcdir=/cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0 >>> --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --localstatedir=/var --sysconfdir=/etc >>> --docdir=/usr/share/doc/gcc --htmldir=/usr/share/doc/gcc/html -C >>> --build=x86_64-pc-cygwin --host=x86_64-pc-cygwin >>> --target=x86_64-pc-cygwin --without-libiconv-prefix >>> --without-libintl-prefix --libexecdir=/usr/lib --enable-shared >>> --enable-shared-libgcc --enable-static >>> --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-bootstrap >>> --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-dwarf2 --with-tune=generic >>> --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto,objc,obj-c++ --enable-graphite >>> --enable-threads=posix --enable-libatomic --enable-libgomp >>> --enable-libquadmath --enable-libquadmath-support --disable-libssp >>> --enable-libada --disable-symvers --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as >>> --with-cloog-include=/usr/include/cloog-isl --without-libiconv-prefix >>> --without-libintl-prefix --with-system-zlib --enable-linker-build-id >>> --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=gcc4-compatible >>> --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts >>> Thread-Modell: posix >>> gcc-Version 9.2.0 (GCC) >>> >>> --- >>> >>> (This is Cygwin64) >>> gcc was updated yesterday. I even downgraded to 7.3.0-3 with no effect. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> Am 24.02.20 um 17:40 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi all, > > After updating a lot of packages (incl. gcc) in Cygwin64 yesterday > I can > no longer build AOO for Windows. > > I get errors in bootstrap while building dmake: > > make[2]: Verzeichnis > „/cygdrive/c/Source/openoffice/main/solenv/wntmsci12.pro/misc/build/dmake-4.12“ > > > wird betreten > depbase=`echo infer.o | sed 's|[^/]*$|.deps/&|;s|\.o$||'`; \ > if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I. -I. -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix > -I./unix/cygwin/gnu -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix -g -O2 -MT > infer.o -MD > -MP -MF "$depbase.Tpo" -c -o infer.o infer.c; \ > then mv -f "$depbase.Tpo" "$depbase.Po"; else rm -f > "$depbase.Tpo"; exit > 1; fi > In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:38, > von infer.c:33: > config.h:188:16: Fehler: doppeltes »unsigned« > 188 | #define size_t unsigned int > | ^~~~ > config.h:188:25: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration > 188 | #define size_t unsigned int > | ^~~ > config.h:185:15: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration > 185 | #define off_t long int > | ^~~~ > config.h:185:20: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration > 185 | #define off_t long int > | ^~~ > In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:86, > von infer.c:33: > itypes.h:58:5: Fehler: #error "No 2 byte type, you lose." > 58 | # error "No 2 byte type, you lose." > | ^ > itypes.h:77:5: Fehler: #error "No 4 byte type, you lose." > 77 | # error "No 4 byte type, you lose." > | ^ > ... > > > Is there anything we can do to ensure that AOO can be built with an > updated Cygwin? > Would Jim's updated dmake help? > > Regards, > Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Errors in bootstrap while building dmake
wohoo! Not our issue are the best issues! Am 25.02.20 um 12:03 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Just today, there was an update of "binutils" for Cygwin and now the errors are gone... ;-) Sorry for the trouble, I am just doing a new build now! Regards, Matthias Am 24.02.20 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi, Am 24.02.20 um 18:18 schrieb Peter Kovacs: can you post what g++ -v prints on bash? --- $ g++ -v Es werden eingebaute Spezifikationen verwendet. COLLECT_GCC=g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-cygwin/9.2.0/lto-wrapper.exe Ziel: x86_64-pc-cygwin Konfiguriert mit: /cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0/configure --srcdir=/cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0 --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --localstatedir=/var --sysconfdir=/etc --docdir=/usr/share/doc/gcc --htmldir=/usr/share/doc/gcc/html -C --build=x86_64-pc-cygwin --host=x86_64-pc-cygwin --target=x86_64-pc-cygwin --without-libiconv-prefix --without-libintl-prefix --libexecdir=/usr/lib --enable-shared --enable-shared-libgcc --enable-static --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-bootstrap --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-dwarf2 --with-tune=generic --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto,objc,obj-c++ --enable-graphite --enable-threads=posix --enable-libatomic --enable-libgomp --enable-libquadmath --enable-libquadmath-support --disable-libssp --enable-libada --disable-symvers --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as --with-cloog-include=/usr/include/cloog-isl --without-libiconv-prefix --without-libintl-prefix --with-system-zlib --enable-linker-build-id --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=gcc4-compatible --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts Thread-Modell: posix gcc-Version 9.2.0 (GCC) --- (This is Cygwin64) gcc was updated yesterday. I even downgraded to 7.3.0-3 with no effect. Regards, Matthias Am 24.02.20 um 17:40 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, After updating a lot of packages (incl. gcc) in Cygwin64 yesterday I can no longer build AOO for Windows. I get errors in bootstrap while building dmake: make[2]: Verzeichnis „/cygdrive/c/Source/openoffice/main/solenv/wntmsci12.pro/misc/build/dmake-4.12“ wird betreten depbase=`echo infer.o | sed 's|[^/]*$|.deps/&|;s|\.o$||'`; \ if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I. -I. -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix -I./unix/cygwin/gnu -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix -g -O2 -MT infer.o -MD -MP -MF "$depbase.Tpo" -c -o infer.o infer.c; \ then mv -f "$depbase.Tpo" "$depbase.Po"; else rm -f "$depbase.Tpo"; exit 1; fi In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:38, von infer.c:33: config.h:188:16: Fehler: doppeltes »unsigned« 188 | #define size_t unsigned int | ^~~~ config.h:188:25: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration 188 | #define size_t unsigned int | ^~~ config.h:185:15: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration 185 | #define off_t long int | ^~~~ config.h:185:20: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration 185 | #define off_t long int | ^~~ In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:86, von infer.c:33: itypes.h:58:5: Fehler: #error "No 2 byte type, you lose." 58 | # error "No 2 byte type, you lose." | ^ itypes.h:77:5: Fehler: #error "No 4 byte type, you lose." 77 | # error "No 4 byte type, you lose." | ^ ... Is there anything we can do to ensure that AOO can be built with an updated Cygwin? Would Jim's updated dmake help? Regards, Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Errors in bootstrap while building dmake
Hi all, Just today, there was an update of "binutils" for Cygwin and now the errors are gone... ;-) Sorry for the trouble, I am just doing a new build now! Regards, Matthias Am 24.02.20 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi, > > Am 24.02.20 um 18:18 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >> can you post what g++ -v prints on bash? > --- > $ g++ -v > Es werden eingebaute Spezifikationen verwendet. > COLLECT_GCC=g++ > COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-cygwin/9.2.0/lto-wrapper.exe > Ziel: x86_64-pc-cygwin > Konfiguriert mit: > /cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0/configure > --srcdir=/cygdrive/i/szsz/tmpp/gcc/gcc-9.2.0-2.x86_64/src/gcc-9.2.0 > --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --localstatedir=/var --sysconfdir=/etc > --docdir=/usr/share/doc/gcc --htmldir=/usr/share/doc/gcc/html -C > --build=x86_64-pc-cygwin --host=x86_64-pc-cygwin > --target=x86_64-pc-cygwin --without-libiconv-prefix > --without-libintl-prefix --libexecdir=/usr/lib --enable-shared > --enable-shared-libgcc --enable-static > --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-bootstrap > --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-dwarf2 --with-tune=generic > --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto,objc,obj-c++ --enable-graphite > --enable-threads=posix --enable-libatomic --enable-libgomp > --enable-libquadmath --enable-libquadmath-support --disable-libssp > --enable-libada --disable-symvers --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as > --with-cloog-include=/usr/include/cloog-isl --without-libiconv-prefix > --without-libintl-prefix --with-system-zlib --enable-linker-build-id > --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=gcc4-compatible > --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts > Thread-Modell: posix > gcc-Version 9.2.0 (GCC) > > --- > > (This is Cygwin64) > gcc was updated yesterday. I even downgraded to 7.3.0-3 with no effect. > > Regards, > > Matthias > >> Am 24.02.20 um 17:40 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> After updating a lot of packages (incl. gcc) in Cygwin64 yesterday I can >>> no longer build AOO for Windows. >>> >>> I get errors in bootstrap while building dmake: >>> >>> make[2]: Verzeichnis >>> „/cygdrive/c/Source/openoffice/main/solenv/wntmsci12.pro/misc/build/dmake-4.12“ >>> >>> wird betreten >>> depbase=`echo infer.o | sed 's|[^/]*$|.deps/&|;s|\.o$||'`; \ >>> if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I. -I. -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix >>> -I./unix/cygwin/gnu -I./unix/cygwin -I./unix -g -O2 -MT infer.o -MD >>> -MP -MF "$depbase.Tpo" -c -o infer.o infer.c; \ >>> then mv -f "$depbase.Tpo" "$depbase.Po"; else rm -f "$depbase.Tpo"; exit >>> 1; fi >>> In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:38, >>> von infer.c:33: >>> config.h:188:16: Fehler: doppeltes »unsigned« >>> 188 | #define size_t unsigned int >>> | ^~~~ >>> config.h:188:25: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration >>> 188 | #define size_t unsigned int >>> | ^~~ >>> config.h:185:15: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration >>> 185 | #define off_t long int >>> | ^~~~ >>> config.h:185:20: Fehler: zwei oder mehr Datentypen in Deklaration >>> 185 | #define off_t long int >>> | ^~~ >>> In Datei, eingebunden von extern.h:86, >>> von infer.c:33: >>> itypes.h:58:5: Fehler: #error "No 2 byte type, you lose." >>> 58 | # error "No 2 byte type, you lose." >>> | ^ >>> itypes.h:77:5: Fehler: #error "No 4 byte type, you lose." >>> 77 | # error "No 4 byte type, you lose." >>> | ^ >>> ... >>> >>> >>> Is there anything we can do to ensure that AOO can be built with an >>> updated Cygwin? >>> Would Jim's updated dmake help? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Matthias >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Windows Installer translation
Hi Pedro, Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino: > Hi Brian, all > > (Brian is included in BCC) > >> On February 24, 2020 4:56 AM Brian Barker >> wrote: >> >> >> At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote: >>> To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could >>> not double-click msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite >>> some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging. > Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder > containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some > cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers > sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a > intermediate folder is really unnecessary. We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and MSVCR100.DLL. Regards, Matthias > >> I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a >> database, required just as much during removal of any product as >> during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft >> Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is >> needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing >> that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation >> and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies >> when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it? > That is correct. At installation time Windows (at least since Windows XP) > stores a copy of the installer in C:\Windows\Installer, renames the file to a > 6 or 7 character name (e.g. 2dfbe4.msi, possibly to simplify information > storage in the registry) and it is this file that is executed when you > uninstall a program. > Therefore keeping the installer on the desktop (or on the same folder where > it was installed from) is no longer needed. When updating the new installer > will look for the version number of the same product and will install if the > version is newer and remove the older version. > >> Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the >> product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and >> may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of >> requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be >> installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently >> as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported >> to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the >> Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version >> from a CD - which he may well no longer have. > I just read the thread. When the installer mentions Disk it just means that > it is looking for the installer file in the same drive/path where it was > installed from (originally this actually meant a CD or even a Floppy disk) > Maybe this user who is sticking to 3.2 (the last Sun branded release from > back in 2010!) is still using Windows 98 or 95? > Nevertheless in some cases (especially when using registry cleaners) the > reference to the installer is lost. I believe the only option is to reinstall > the broken version and uninstall before installing a new version > https://www.openoffice.org/download/archive.html > > Hope this helps > Pedro > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Windows Installer translation
Hi Brian, all (Brian is included in BCC) > On February 24, 2020 4:56 AM Brian Barker > wrote: > > > At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > > >To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could > >not double-click msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite > >some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging. Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a intermediate folder is really unnecessary. > I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a > database, required just as much during removal of any product as > during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft > Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is > needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing > that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation > and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies > when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it? That is correct. At installation time Windows (at least since Windows XP) stores a copy of the installer in C:\Windows\Installer, renames the file to a 6 or 7 character name (e.g. 2dfbe4.msi, possibly to simplify information storage in the registry) and it is this file that is executed when you uninstall a program. Therefore keeping the installer on the desktop (or on the same folder where it was installed from) is no longer needed. When updating the new installer will look for the version number of the same product and will install if the version is newer and remove the older version. > Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the > product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and > may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of > requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be > installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently > as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported > to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the > Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version > from a CD - which he may well no longer have. I just read the thread. When the installer mentions Disk it just means that it is looking for the installer file in the same drive/path where it was installed from (originally this actually meant a CD or even a Floppy disk) Maybe this user who is sticking to 3.2 (the last Sun branded release from back in 2010!) is still using Windows 98 or 95? Nevertheless in some cases (especially when using registry cleaners) the reference to the installer is lost. I believe the only option is to reinstall the broken version and uninstall before installing a new version https://www.openoffice.org/download/archive.html Hope this helps Pedro - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
