On Fri, 2026-05-08 at 07:40 +0200, Robert Großkopf wrote:
> Hi Harvey,
> > 
> > Yes, my output ends similarly, but there are no entries like the
> > '(supported, searched)' against any of the 3 versions.
> > 
> > Does that mean I have a v1 processor and the support for v1 has
> > been
> > removed with LO 26.2 onward?
> > 
> > ....hmm, not very environmentally friendly if I have to throw my
> > old
> > working configurations onto the rubbish tip.  Hoping that is not
> > yet
> > necessary, before I also have to leave the scene. My Dell desktop
> > is
> > proving to be very robust.
> 
> Hope the following will show it right way:
> 
> The building of packages will be made on a system, where
> x86-64-v2 (supported, searched)
> is the result. So you need a system with the same minimum to use the 
> packages.
> 
> You could cretae your own packages of the source Code of LO and it
> will 
> work.
> 
> I would prefer to use the latest packages of LO 25.8., because you
> will 
> need this for your database.
> 
Hi Robert,
all I understand is that the LO packages must be built for
compatibility with my version of x86-64 processors. The role of those 3
empty subfolders and the significance of the '(supported, search)'
flags, I can only make a vague guess.
Harvey
 

 

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Reply via email to