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]
