I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more stable on my
system.
Uwe
Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
Joseph wrote:
Is there a benefit of compiling Openoffice 2.0 vs. installing from
binary.
I've AMD 1.8Mhz with 1Gb or Ram and it has been compiling OO 2.0 for
7-hours
Uwe Klosa wrote:
I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more
stable on my system.
Uwe
I always compile mine to. It is downloading it now. Why is it only
32MBs this time? It was over 200MBs last time.
Dale
:-)
--
To err is human, I'm most certainly human.
--
The first file is only 32MB. There are more to come. :)
Uwe
Dale wrote:
Uwe Klosa wrote:
I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more
stable on my system.
Uwe
I always compile mine to. It is downloading it now. Why is it only
32MBs this time? It was over 200MBs
I'll agree here: I sometimes download a new binary to test before seeing
if I really want it - then compile it. Compiled is usually subjectively
faster, and definitely more stable.
Besides, as someone else put it, its more fun ...
BillK
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 09:00 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
I
Uh Oh. Here goes my dial-up. I only get 26K here. Last time it took
three nights to get it all, about 24 hours total.
I may go visit my friend that has DSL. LOL
Dale
:-)
Uwe Klosa wrote:
The first file is only 32MB. There are more to come. :)
Uwe
Dale wrote:
Uwe Klosa wrote:
I
On 2005-11-30 08:12:34 +0100 (Wed, Nov), Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
Joseph wrote:
Is there a benefit of compiling Openoffice 2.0 vs. installing from
binary.
I've AMD 1.8Mhz with 1Gb or Ram and it has been compiling OO 2.0 for
7-hours already.
It's likely to take somewhere around
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 03:00 am, a tiny voice compelled Uwe Klosa to
write:
I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more stable on
my system.
I've installed OO both ways in the past and stability hasn't been an issue.
The only thing I noticed is that the compiled
Ernie Schroder wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 03:00 am, a tiny voice compelled Uwe Klosa to
write:
I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more stable on
my system.
I've installed OO both ways in the past and stability hasn't been an issue.
The only thing I
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 09:00 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
I have used both versions. The compiled version seems to be more stable on my
system.
Uwe
[snip]
I've compile OO 2.0 without any errors.
But when I just open and save a spreadsheet OO 2.0 crashed on me with
[signal.11].
Not a good
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 08:30:24 -0500, Ernie Schroder wrote:
I've installed OO both ways in the past and stability hasn't been an
issue. The only thing I noticed is that the compiled version opens
faster than the binary version. As I remember, the difference was
roughly 7 seconds. It seems like
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 09:18 am, a tiny voice compelled Neil Bothwick
to write:
Except that you don't sit and watch it compile (unless you are
exceptionally sad
You mean you don't have to keep watch over long compiles? I guess I have no
life.
Actually Neil, you're right, the 8 hours
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ernie Schroder wrote:
time, but try playing poker on-line while it's running. I can never remember
to do those long builds while I sleep so I end up, in this case, and for
Well, I wrote a latemerge script that sets up an at cron job :P - So, I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman wrote:
Well, I wrote a latemerge script that sets up an at cron job :P - So, I
emerge it in the
moment but starts at night.
sed -e 's/cron//'
- --
Arturo Buanzo Busleiman - www.buanzo.com.ar
Consultor en Seguridad
Ernie Schroder wrote:
I've recently done 11 months worth of updates on this box and have about 40
hours of build time on it in the last 10 days. I want to use it, not watch
more text fly by on the console.
Try compiling it at a lower priority.
I just put this in my /etc/make.conf file:
Did you import your settings from an older OO version? I had that issue with the binary version upgrading from 1.x. So I did a clean
install with the source code version.
Uwe
Joseph wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 09:00 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
I have used both versions. The compiled version
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:01 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
Did you import your settings from an older OO version? I had that issue with
the binary version upgrading from 1.x. So I did a clean
install with the source code version.
Uwe
What do you mean import your settings from an older OO
Joseph wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:01 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
Did you import your settings from an older OO version? I had that issue with the binary version upgrading from 1.x. So I did a clean
install with the source code version.
Uwe
What do you mean import your settings
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:35:48 -0500, Ernie Schroder wrote:
Actually Neil, you're right, the 8 hours that it takes to build OO is
not down time, but try playing poker on-line while it's running.
No thanks, I'm broke enough as it is :(
I can
never remember to do those long builds while I
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:48 +0100, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
Joseph wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:01 +0100, Uwe Klosa wrote:
Did you import your settings from an older OO version? I had that issue
with the binary version upgrading from 1.x. So I did a clean
install with the
Ernie Schroder wrote:
Actually Neil, you're right, the 8 hours that it takes to build OO is not down
time, but try playing poker on-line while it's running. I can never remember
to do those long builds while I sleep so I end up, in this case, and for
firefox, going for the immediate
Use rsync. I am not sure how much gain there is to be had but try using
an older version as the seed file - should save at least a little.
Creative use of head/tail with seed files and already downloaded
portions can save a lot if the link drops out halfway.
Make sure you use the -P option (read
On Thursday 01 December 2005 03:17, W.Kenworthy wrote:
Use rsync. I am not sure how much gain there is to be had but try using
an older version as the seed file - should save at least a little.
Creative use of head/tail with seed files and already downloaded
portions can save a lot if the
Joseph wrote:
Is there a benefit of compiling Openoffice 2.0 vs. installing from
binary.
I've AMD 1.8Mhz with 1Gb or Ram and it has been compiling OO 2.0 for
7-hours already.
It's likely to take somewhere around 8-11 hours on such a machine. It
took somewhere around 10 hours for me on a
23 matches
Mail list logo
