Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? gary In my experience 1G of memory is fine to build OpenOffice, but that HD space is required. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? It got the right port... OOo-2 from ports is really odd anyways... some people seem to be able to get it made right out of the box and others can't as far I can tell there is no rhyme or reason as to why it fails or does not fail just install from a package (I have attempted to compile it at least 30 different times/ways and every single one fails on the same set of files [I even went back and reinstalled every port it depends on using settings recommended on various places]) look back in the archives for my last or second last post to -qeustions for the latest (failed) attempt. -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not Business, Friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
Gary Kline writes: I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? I have successfully built OOo 2.3 in 512mb. Took 16+ hours, but it worked. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? I think the problem is that the build does take so long and so much resources that the package updates are a bit scarce. The latest I can see on the mirrors is openoffice.org-2.3.20070910.tbz which doesnt seem to fit the numbering scheme for the openoffice.org-2 port but does fit openoffice.org-2-RC which seems a bit odd. I would probably just get the latest package from the openoffice package site (ftp://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/FreeBSD/2.3.0/i386/FreeBSD6) and upgrade manually. As a 7.0 user I had to build my own which took a while. Vince gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 23:21:25 -0400 Aryeh M. Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? It got the right port... OOo-2 from ports is really odd anyways... some people seem to be able to get it made right out of the box and others can't as far I can tell there is no rhyme or reason as to why it fails or does not fail I wouldn't say that. I've been building it for years, and in my experience it's just like any other port, mostly it builds, occasionally it doesn't, when it doesn't I just stick to the old version until it does. Its complexity make it a bit more unreliable, but not radically so. OTOH I use security branches and i386, so I have every advantage. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: OOo-2 from ports is really odd anyways... some people seem to be able to get it made right out of the box and others can't as far I can tell there is no rhyme or reason as to why it fails or does not fail Seem to recall that OOo won't complete a build on a filesystem with noatime; there's a perl(? it's a long time since I did this) script that can't tell the difference between an fstat successfully returning 0 (for midnight, Jan 1 1970) and failing. jan -- jan grant, ISYS, University of Bristol. http://www.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44 (0)117 3317661 http://ioctl.org/jan/ OORDBMSs make me feel old; I remember when this was all fields. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 12:14:40AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote: Gary Kline writes: I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? I have successfully built OOo 2.3 in 512mb. Took 16+ hours, but it worked. That's what I wanted to know: I don't care if it take three weeks so long as it'll build on a gig of SDRAM. gary Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:11:40AM +, Vince wrote: Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? I think the problem is that the build does take so long and so much resources that the package updates are a bit scarce. The latest I can see on the mirrors is openoffice.org-2.3.20070910.tbz which doesnt seem to fit the numbering scheme for the openoffice.org-2 port but does fit openoffice.org-2-RC which seems a bit odd. I would probably just get the latest package from the openoffice package site (ftp://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/FreeBSD/2.3.0/i386/FreeBSD6) and upgrade manually. As a 7.0 user I had to build my own which took a while. Thanks foe thr ftp. I'll see if I can grab it? gary Vince gary -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 01:55:57PM -0800, Gary Kline wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:11:40AM +, Vince wrote: Gary Kline wrote: I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? I think the problem is that the build does take so long and so much resources that the package updates are a bit scarce. The latest I can see on the mirrors is openoffice.org-2.3.20070910.tbz which doesnt seem to fit the numbering scheme for the openoffice.org-2 port but does fit openoffice.org-2-RC which seems a bit odd. I would probably just get the latest package from the openoffice package site (ftp://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/FreeBSD/2.3.0/i386/FreeBSD6) and upgrade manually. As a 7.0 user I had to build my own which took a while. Thanks foe thr ftp. I'll see if I can grab it? gary Update: lynx is the better tool for this kind of job. Looks like after several hours I'll move up a couple of OOo releases. -gk -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is this for OO-2 for FBSD?
I'm in the middle of upgrading some platforms and just caught OOo_OOG680_m6_source.tar.bz2 (278MB) being downloaded. The port says that this is OO-2.3, but the build says Ishould have 11GB of disk and ~2GB of memory. I somehow downloaded OO_2.3 as a package on one platform. Does this make any sense? How many of us have 2 gigs of memory? Seems more than a biit irrational to me. Or did my portupgrade -aP grab the wrong port? gary -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OO 2
kalin mintchev wrote: hi... how long should take to build openofice2 from ports?! it has been going on for almost 24 hours now... Last time it took's me... for my 2.5 Gz athlon 1.5 days, and for 733 Mz Celeron almost 4 days ))) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OO 2
hi... how long should take to build openofice2 from ports?! it has been going on for almost 24 hours now... -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OO 2
On Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:48:02 PM, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OO 2 Wrote these words of wisdom: hi... how long should take to build openofice2 from ports?! it has been going on for almost 24 hours now... * REPLY SEPARATOR * On 10/11/2005 5:29:42 PM, Gerard Replied: It might be nice if you were to include some other pertinent information, such: 1) CPU type and speed 2) Available RAM 3) What else you have running at the time. 4) What make switches, if any, did you invoke. Even with that, it would be just a guess. The last time I did it, and that was about 1-1/2 years ago, it required 2-1/2 days I believe. I know it took a lot longer than it was worth. -- Gerard Seibert [EMAIL PROTECTED] It take many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
