@Kay, I believe the dialog is still there for optionally setting associations for .doc, .ppt, and .xls works. I should double-check that too. But there is definitely no detection that .odt, .ods, .odp, etc., are already assigned to an application other than OpenOffice.org, and no polite request or warning.
I need to do this on purpose under repeatable test conditions and capture details for a bug report. But I have seen it too often without warning of any kind during installs I was conducting for other purposes. - Dennis (It is too late to complain about the silent, automatic removal of earlier OO.o versions. It would have been good to follow the LibreOffice precedent of having OpenOffice3.4 start its own install directory, etc., just as the 3.x versions of LO do.) -----Original Message----- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 15:43 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: Linux install issues On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org > wrote: > I am not changing anything. I don't think there is any such thing as > owning file names and it is too late to claim them now. And that doesn't > matter. What matters is the impact on users and on the cost of supporting > them with the present arrangement. > > - Dennis > > PS: I am also annoyed by the heavy-handed way that AOO 3.4.0 stomps on > existing file associations too. > no advance warning? asking politely? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Juergen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com] > Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 13:56 > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org > Subject: Re: Linux install issues > > Am Samstag, 19. Mai 2012 um 19:32 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: > > One enduring solution would be to break with the past and not use > the same file names for the binary bits, the same registry keys, etc., any > longer. That would solve a few problems on Windows too. > > > I think we own the name and we are probably not the project who should > change any names. > We should be careful with this kind of changes because we can potentially > break a lot of existing projects who rely on names, registry entries etc. > > So please be careful with such changes without deeper analysis what > depends in this... > > Juergen > > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 10:01 > To: ooo-dev > Subject: Linux install issues > > Hi all-- > > It seems we are running into a number of very difficult problems > with Linux > installs, the latest just e-mailed to this list this morning, due > to the > way some vendors have installed LO. > > see: > > http://markmail.org/message/qz72ouzjvcm7uyfn > > > I'd really like to provide additional help in the install guide: > > http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html > > but I'm at a loss as to what this should say. > > I took a look at SOME of the postings on the support forums and > well, still > at a loss. Generally, it seems that completely uninstall the old > OOo 3.3 is > a given (please correct me if I'm wrong about this), but how to > handle some > of the LO overlap? > > Can we get some opinions on what's the most accurate way to go about > installing AOO 3.4 on linux? > > * completely de-install LO first? install AOO 3.4, the re-install > LO? > * completely de-install old OOo 3.3? and then? > > Thankfully, I did not run into these kinds of issues with my distro. > > -- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > MzK > > "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated." > -- Mark Twain > > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated." -- Mark Twain
