I did some more playing around with it, and copying the dll from Java's bin folder to the Open Office main program directory also solved the issue with Base and Wizards. I don't know if this information will be useful or not, but thought I would mention it.
The "Finger pointing" wasn't meant in a bad way, and I'm sorry if it was taken as such. All I'm saying is that Open Office relies on Java. Java is going to be updated from time to time due to security or feature enhancements. Of course to keep their product secure and working with the things THEY rely on, they will update their development tools. My point is, there are already 2 versions of this DLL in the Open Office main program directory... The issue has popped up before, or a previous developer knew of the issue and just stuck it in there any way. Until the political/technical issues of how to fix it during install are worked out, why not put a warning or note on the main download page. "If your Java version is 6.35 or above, you will need to download and install the C++ redistributable (Link to the download page at MS)." This would still turn off a couple of new users because they don't want to jump through hoops to just make things work, but will eliminate the ones who follow directions from having to see the "Java is corrupt" (Which is a horrid, horrid error to present to an end user IMHO) error when they want to use Base, Help or a wizard. Thank you again for your time, and all the hard work each and every one of you do. Again, I like this product and would like to see it's popularity rival that of MS office. -- jsmith...@fastmail.fm On Sun, Sep 16, 2012, at 05:15 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 03:46:16AM -0700, jsmith...@fastmail.fm wrote: > > Even if it is not the fault of Open Office Developers that it is broken, > > pointing fingers (even in the correct direction) does nothing to gain > > new users. > > > It's funny how people get dramatic. I wasn't pointing fingers, I was > simply describing my interpretation of the "facts"; the fact is that > there is a bug, that has to be closed as wontfix or left open depending > on a *new* one: install the MSVCRedist (which IMO is no defect, but > a request for enhancement). > > I quote again the link in my previous mail: > http://www.duckware.com/tech/java6msvcr71.html it has a dramatic and > hilarious tone, with its bold, italic, and red: "Sun's fix is to copy > msvcr71.dll next to the EXE. But in the future, when Sun moves on to > another msvcr##.dll version, your EXE will still work, right? NO. Your > 'fixed' app works just fine now, but when Java 7 ships and requires > msvcr100.dll, your application will once again break. Sun has learned > nothing from this experience because they are recommending a course of > action where they know that EXE's will once again break in the future > when a new Java VM is shipped." > > > I hope my comments on this issue are welcomed > > Yes, they are :) In fact, you solved the mystery of this bug that > no developer could reproduce (no one can fix something she/he cannot > reproduce). > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina > Email had 1 attachment: > + Attachment2 > 1k (application/pgp-signature) -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.
