[tdf-discuss] Ping Florian - StartCom Certs

Florian, you need to update the new StartCom Certs to include libreoffice.org. www.libreoffice.org uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is only valid for the following names: *.documentfoundation.org , documentfoundation.org (Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain)

[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10

On 02/21/2011 01:16 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Peter Junge wrote: >> On 02/21/2011 04:18 PM, M Henri Day wrote: >> >> SCIM is AFAIK really outdated. > > SCIM works fine, worked fine for the past years. ... http://sourceforge.net/projects/scim/

[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10

On 02/21/2011 12:18 AM, M Henri Day wrote: > 2011/2/21 NoOp <... >> Perhaps try iBus instead? >> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ibus >> > > NoOp, thanks for your suggestion. Alas, I found myself unable to get IBus to > work ; for example, after installing IBus

[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10

On 02/20/2011 07:39 AM, M Henri Day wrote: > I recently had occasion to reinstall 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10 (n b, not because > of a problem in Ubuntu itself, but because I replaced Windows Vista with > Windows 7 on the Windows side of this dual-boot machine and thereafter > failed in my attempts to rest

[tdf-discuss] Re: RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs

On 02/14/2011 12:13 PM, twcw chenhall wrote: > On 12/02/11 00:55, NoOp wrote: >> RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs >> http://www.libreoffice.org/download/pre-releases/ >> 64bit .debs are there, but not the 32bit .debs. >> >> Clicking on 'Linux x86 (deb) resu

[tdf-discuss] Re: Trouble installing on Windows XP

On 02/10/2011 12:32 PM, abenglen wrote: > > I have used OpenOffice for several years, and now I am trying to install > LibreOffice on a Windows XP computer. About 4/5th the way thru installing > (according to progress on the "status" bar), installation stops (hangs) and > goes no further. There

[tdf-discuss] Re: Extensions for LibreOffice

On 02/12/2011 02:17 AM, M Henri Day wrote: > 2011/2/12 Robert Holtzman > >> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:46:02PM +0100, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: >> > Christophe Strobbe schrieb: >> > >> > > >> > >I hope they are, but[...] >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I see several problems: >> >

[tdf-discuss] RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs

RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs http://www.libreoffice.org/download/pre-releases/ 64bit .debs are there, but not the 32bit .debs. Clicking on 'Linux x86 (deb) results in: null Also checking:

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] 恭禧發財

On 02/04/2011 12:18 AM, M Henri Day wrote: > 2011/2/4 Harold Fuchs ... >> Google translator translates your "戴安理" as "Diane Li". Why, please? I have >> *no* Chinese of any description (Mandarin, Cantonese, ...) whatsoever so, if >> it's a pun or similar, please explain. >> >> Oh, and to James Wil

Re: [tdf-discuss] 恭禧發財

On 02/03/2011 09:11 AM, Nguyen Vu Hung wrote: > 2011/2/3 drew : >> The year of the Rabbit is upon us, >> >> So >>go do what rabbit's do! >> >> Which is . >>tell all their friends about LibreOffice! >> >> 长寿 > 恭禧發財 > > Well, it is fine to mix 繁体 and 简体 > > 恭禧發財 Gong Xi Fa

[tdf-discuss] Re: EPS images in ODF documents

On 02/01/2011 01:44 AM, Magnus Johansson wrote: > > I have made two test files with the kind of EPS images I work with. I put the > test together with OOo in the ODT document and then printed a PDF file of > that document with CUPS-PDF; I hope I managed to upload and attach them here > properly. W

[tdf-discuss] Re: EPS images in ODF documents

On 01/30/2011 04:01 AM, Magnus Johansson wrote: > > Halló Sveinn, and thanks for your reply. I don't know if my EPS images are > vector graphics or bitmapped. How can I find out? This discussion is probably better over on the libereoffice user list - that way you might find more answers. I've ha

[tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation launches LibreOffice 3.3

On 01/27/2011 03:34 AM, Michael Meeks wrote: > Hi there, > > On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 18:43 -0800, NoOp wrote: >> It also still uses soffice.exe et all in Windows; meaning that LO still >> takes over OOo if both are installed in parallel. > > Unfortunately, the

[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice Final or still RC4 (64 Deb)

On 01/27/2011 05:01 PM, Johanes Lee wrote: > Hi, > > I downloaded LibreOffice 64-bit for Deb Version: > LibO_3.3.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz > > But extracted as following directory > LibO_3.3.0rc4_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US > > Install success, > > Found this version informatio

[tdf-discuss] Re: Hate to mention this but

On 01/27/2011 02:50 PM, Mark Preston wrote: > The other day we were sent a document but the sender had - presumably > by mistake - a template rather than document and in the DOTX format. > Searching the web, we found this is a horrible format with which an > awful lot of people have had problems wi

[tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation launches LibreOffice 3.3

On 01/25/2011 06:43 PM, NoOp wrote: ... >> - the Windows installer, which is going to impact the largest and most >> diverse user base, has been integrated into a single build containing >> all language versions, thus reducing the size for download sites from 75 >> to 11

[tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation launches LibreOffice 3.3

Somebody forgot to tell Florian... On 01/25/2011 03:06 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: > The Document Foundation launches LibreOffice 3.3 > > The first stable release of the free office suite is available for download > > The Internet, January 25, 2011 - The Document Foundation launches > LibreO

[tdf-discuss] Re: Co-working with Moz, etc

On 01/02/2011 10:49 AM, Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2011-01-01 1:43 PM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: >> Whats really held OOo and will hold LO back is the lack of an equivalent >> program such as outlook. > > Well, I disagree, but there is no way to prove one of us is right, so... > >> There are one o

[tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

On 01/01/2011 12:58 PM, Sveinn í Felli wrote: > Þann lau 1.jan 2011 19:57, skrifaði NoOp: >> On 12/31/2010 02:18 AM, Sveinn í Felli wrote: >>> But I think that in a corporate context, a batch program for converting >>> .doc and .docx to ODF would get some suppo

[tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

On 12/31/2010 02:18 AM, Sveinn í Felli wrote: > But I think that in a corporate context, a batch program for converting > .doc and .docx to ODF would get some support and would/could ease the > conversion. After all those years, there's a pile of .docs sitting on > most PCs in this world. And ha

[tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

On 12/31/2010 08:14 AM, Steven Shelton wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/31/2010 10:03 AM, Kevin André wrote: >> I would suggest the following instead. Support OOXML completely, >> but when the user saves his/her document in a proprietary format >> display a co

[tdf-discuss] Re: Happy New Year from Arizona

On 12/31/2010 08:38 PM, Timothy Mark Brennan, Jr. wrote: > Happy New Year from Brazil > > 2011/1/1 Prabath Galagamage : >> Happy New Year from Sri Lanka Happy New Year from San Jose/Milpitas, California -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http:/

[tdf-discuss] Re: Change executable names

On 12/20/2010 12:19 PM, Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2010-12-17 8:09 PM, NoOp wrote: >> - LO takes over all OOo application defaults & icons. >> - LO uses the same executable names as OOo (soffice.exe, swriter.exe, >> etc). This makes it impossible to select an .odt and re

[tdf-discuss] [Change executable names] Re: Digest of discuss@documentfoundation.org issue 127 (3742-3762)

On 12/17/2010 05:53 AM, Jaime R. Garza wrote: > As many others already commented, I believe it's time that LibreOffice > changes the names of some of the individual applications, my humble > proposal: > > Write > Spread > Present > Draw > Formula > Base This is critical when attempting to have OO

[tdf-discuss] Re: PDF export in CMYK

On 12/15/2010 02:07 PM, Tibor Bamhor wrote: > > Hi, Friend of mine had an issue with openoffice, He was asked to > deliver pdf in CMYK colorspace. It is not possible by now AFAIK. But > are there any plans or any work being done in this regard? I just > wonder, it is not critical issue for me, nor

[tdf-discuss] Re: About bundled fonts

On 12/16/2010 01:06 PM, NoOp wrote: > On 12/16/2010 12:57 PM, RGB ES wrote: >> 2010/12/16 NoOp : >>> But I reckon that this can be fixed by not installing, or uninstalling >>> (on my debian based system): >>> libobasis3.3-ooofonts_3.3.0-17_i386.deb >>

[tdf-discuss] Re: About bundled fonts

On 12/16/2010 12:57 PM, RGB ES wrote: > 2010/12/16 NoOp : >> But I reckon that this can be fixed by not installing, or uninstalling >> (on my debian based system): >> libobasis3.3-ooofonts_3.3.0-17_i386.deb > > Umm, well, no: this will not install opensymbol font so yo

[tdf-discuss] Re: About bundled fonts

On 12/06/2010 11:08 AM, RGB ES wrote: > 2010/12/6 Andras Timar <...>: >> Hi Ricardo, >> >> Libertine and Libertine G are different. The later is a Graphite font >> which utilizes the Graphite engine in LibreOffice. See: >> http://www.numbertext.org/linux/ > > I know this quite well (I use graphite

[tdf-discuss] Re: Why is LO/OOo so slow loading a spreadsheet?

On 12/04/2010 11:13 AM, Cor Nouws wrote: > Kohei Yoshida wrote (04-12-10 17:51) >> Hi there, >> >> On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 02:32 -0800, plino wrote: >>> The xlsx file is in the link above. Here is the ODS >>> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2347109/30_line_sample.ods >> >> Are this file and the .xlsx var

[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.

On 12/02/2010 11:57 AM, BRM wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: Robert Derman >> I remember that optical disks started to replace floppies in about 1995 >>because Win-95 came either way. Win-98 was CD only. I will admit that DVD >>burners didn't become affordable until about 20

[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.

On 11/30/2010 02:43 AM, plino wrote: > > The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and > only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). > Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? > > The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 lang

[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.

On 11/26/2010 12:16 PM, Robert Derman wrote: > Marc Paré wrote: ... >> Of these two options, I would prefer being offered the menu AFTER >> having downloaded the LO suite. The reason for this: some users may >> find that downloading the suite took a longer than the anticipated >> time and they w

[tdf-discuss] Re: functionality issues discussions

On 11/23/2010 11:16 PM, Marwan Gedeon wrote: > I'm sorry if asking this here is inappropriate, I couldn't find the > answer in FAQ, neither another mailing list dedicated for that purpose: > what is the proper place/people to resort to, in order to report/resolve > issues with current LibreOffice's

[tdf-discuss] Re: Request: Installation Instructions

On 11/22/2010 08:09 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote: > > > On 11/22/2010 06:37 PM, NoOp wrote: ... > ...And NoOp, again, I thank you for taking the time and > effort to try to make it easier for others to install the .debs on > Debian and Debian derivatives (even Ubuntu :-) ). >

[tdf-discuss] Re: Take over of Novell

On 11/22/2010 10:10 AM, Ian Lynch wrote: > Is the take over of Novell going to affect the document foundation? > Actually, isn't this sort of thing the reason TDF was created to begin with? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.document

[tdf-discuss] Re: Request: Installation Instructions

On 11/22/2010 04:33 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote: > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:04:29AM -0700, Craig A. Eddy wrote: >> listed in the README_en-US file. I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I > > Then get. You administer a Debian-based system without knowing dpkg? Oh my. > > (Besides that, http://packag

[tdf-discuss] Re: Request: Installation Instructions

On 11/22/2010 06:43 AM, Craig A. Eddy wrote: ... > René > > It isn't so much that I administer a Debian release as that I USE a > Debian release and do what I can. What I do is what I have managed to > learn to do over time, but without any formal training in UNIX, Linux, > administration, coding

[tdf-discuss] Re: About Cacert SSL certificates (was: Feature request for 3.3 still possible?)

On 11/09/2010 03:45 AM, David Nelson wrote: > Hi Guy, :-) > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 18:13, Guy Voets wrote: >> You have asked SeaMonkey to connect securely to bugs.freedesktop.org, >> but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. >> >> Normally, when you try to connect securely, sites wil

[tdf-discuss] Re: Version Numbers?

On 11/19/2010 06:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote: > Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit : >> On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote: >>> As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project >>> derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use

[tdf-discuss] Re: Problems with DEB files

On 11/18/2010 12:12 PM, Cor Nouws wrote: > Andy Brown wrote (18-11-10 20:34) >> Is anyone besides me having a problem opening the DEB archives for Beta >> 3? I keep getting an error tar: This does not look like a tar archive. > > I had the same problem with beta 2. > So after some silence on the l

[tdf-discuss] Re: Version Numbers?

On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote: > As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project > derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version > numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in > peoples minds that we are a se

[tdf-discuss] Re: Old Bugs

On 11/02/2010 08:28 AM, T. J. Brumfield wrote: > There were several old, often commented on, and often requested bug fixes > and features that didn't receive much attention or weren't resolved with OOo > over the years. > > For those who may not be aware of the reasons for the shift/fork, or for >

Re: [tdf-discuss] LibreOffice crashes when inserting caption

On 10/13/2010 05:22 PM, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-13 20:06, NoOp a écrit : >> On 10/13/2010 10:26 AM, leif wrote: >>> The Beta2 crashes when inserting caption text in Writer. >>> >>> I'm using Ubuntu 32bit. >> >> Confirm. Can you please

Re: [tdf-discuss] LibreOffice crashes when inserting caption

On 10/13/2010 05:06 PM, NoOp wrote: > On 10/13/2010 10:26 AM, leif wrote: >> The Beta2 crashes when inserting caption text in Writer. >> >> I'm using Ubuntu 32bit. > > Confirm. Can you please move this over to the users list & perhaps we > can figure out

Re: [tdf-discuss] LibreOffice crashes when inserting caption

On 10/13/2010 10:26 AM, leif wrote: > The Beta2 crashes when inserting caption text in Writer. > > I'm using Ubuntu 32bit. Confirm. Can you please move this over to the users list & perhaps we can figure out how to troubleshoot? Gary (NoOp) -- To unsubscribe, e

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/13/2010 11:14 AM, NoOp wrote: > On 10/13/2010 10:52 AM, Volker Merschmann wrote: ... >> It is very much recommended to do the uninstall of beta1. >> If you try to over-install with beta2 you will have two will have two >> entries for LO in the system control panel afterw

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/13/2010 10:52 AM, Volker Merschmann wrote: > Hi, > > 2010/10/13 NoOp : ... >> I'm preparing to test it now: >> <http://mirrors.supportex.net/tdf/libreoffice/testing/3.3.0-beta2/win/x86/> >> Note that it's a huge download: 318M >> > Thi

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/13/2010 08:59 AM, Ken Brown wrote: > On 10/12/2010 4:30 AM, Fridrich Strba wrote: > It was me that screwed it up and during the pre-announcement >> phase sprint, I forgot to regenerate the product IDs and thus LO had the >> product IDs of OOo. This is fixed in beta2, so stay tuned. As a >> si

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/12/2010 01:30 AM, Fridrich Strba wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Please, don't enter into political consideration of something that was > just a bug. It was me that screwed it up and during the pre-announcement > phase sprint, I forgot to regenerate the product I

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/11/2010 06:56 PM, Scott Furry wrote: > Let me assure you that your answers are import and won't get > lost|forgotten. I've received about a dozen responses so far and each > has been tucked away for easy retrieval when I go to do a final > summation. I was thinking of giving the thread at

Re: [tdf-discuss] Survey|Opinion - LibreOffice Install and Update

On 10/09/2010 02:23 PM, Scott Furry wrote: > This survey is to gauge the views of the LibreOffice community on the > install/update method of LibreOffice. Please voice your opinion so that > these considerations may be taken into account when the LibreOffice > method of install/update is studie

Re: [tdf-discuss] Windows Install

On 10/11/2010 05:44 PM, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-11 19:00, NoOp a écrit : >> LibO install in Windows currently follows the go-oo practice of removing >> existing OOo installs (without warning). It can of course be installed >> in parallel (see my thread "[libreoffic

[tdf-discuss] Windows Install

LibO install in Windows currently follows the go-oo practice of removing existing OOo installs (without warning). It can of course be installed in parallel (see my thread "[libreoffice-users] [Windows] LibO in parallel w/OOo?" on the users list, but that provides several distinct disadvantages: 1.

Re: LibO Install/Update ( was [tdf-discuss] Automatic Updates)

On 10/09/2010 12:38 PM, jonathon wrote: ... > OOo in the official Ubuntu repository is version 3.1. In the PPA 3.2 is > available. > > jonathon Actually, for the current stable (LTS) released version of Ubuntu (Lucid) the version is 3.2.0 (3.2.1 in proposed): https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source

Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE

On 10/09/2010 03:36 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: > Hi, > > Am 09.10.2010 um 05:20 schrieb NoOp: > >> Like the OOo lists (and other gmane.org lists), posts via gmane.org >> shouldn't also require a direct email subscription as gmane.org does > the >> email

Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE

On 10/08/2010 09:24 PM, Marc Paré wrote: ... > Oops, I am not sure how long it takes for the process to remove me. I > just got my posted message through the mailist. Still not un-subscribed > yet. I'll give it another 15 minutes or so. > > Marc > My guess is that it didn't work & that you'll

Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE

On 10/08/2010 07:40 PM, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-08 20:33, NoOp a écrit : >> On 10/06/2010 06:12 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> finally, this list is also available via GMANE: >>> http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundat

Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE

On 10/06/2010 06:12 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: > Hi, > > finally, this list is also available via GMANE: > http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss > > Florian > Working? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to th

<    1   2