Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi All, I now have installed AOO on Ubuntu Unity 22.04 and the UI falls back to some kind of Windows look. I also have big problems when the windows size changes. Maybe we can circumvent these problems with an AppImage? If I only could test one... ;-) Regards, Matthias Am 12.06.23 um 23:09 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi Andrea, Any news on this? I would love to test the AppImage! Regards, Matthias Am 08.05.23 um 18:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: For those just now looking into this here is a link: https://docs.appimage.org/ If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. It's basically the same as https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi Andrea, Any news on this? I would love to test the AppImage! Regards, Matthias Am 08.05.23 um 18:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: >> For those just now looking into this here is a link: >> https://docs.appimage.org/ >> If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly >> reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. > > I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) > ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. > > I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next > weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. > > It's basically the same as > https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Fwd: Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Resending my email from yesterday :) -- Original Message -- From: Pedro Lino To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Date: 05/08/2023 6:32 PM WEST Subject: Re: User Installation Process Feedback Hi Andrea > On 05/08/2023 5:37 PM BST Andrea Pescetti mailto:pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: > > > For those just now looking into this here is a link: > > https://docs.appimage.org/ > > If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly reduce > > the many Linux packages we create when we release. > > > I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) > ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. > > I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next weekend > if anyone wishes to play with it. > Yes, please! Is it 4.1.14? Thanks! Pedro > > It's basically the same as > https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi Andrea, Am 08.05.23 um 18:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: >> For those just now looking into this here is a link: >> https://docs.appimage.org/ >> If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly >> reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. > > I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) > ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. > > I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next > weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. Yes, that would be great! Regards, Matthias > > It's basically the same as > https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
This was a system wide problem which is now resolved. Thanks to Infra! Matthias Am 09.05.23 um 13:10 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi all, > > Yesterday, I answered to Andreas' post, but it still does not show up > here... > > Is it "lost in moderation" or do we have technical problems? > > Regards, > > Matthias > > Am 08.05.23 um 18:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: >> On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: >>> For those just now looking into this here is a link: >>> https://docs.appimage.org/ >>> If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly >>> reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. >> I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) >> ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. >> >> I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next >> weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. >> >> It's basically the same as >> https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ >> >> Regards, >> Andrea. >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi all, Yesterday, I answered to Andreas' post, but it still does not show up here... Is it "lost in moderation" or do we have technical problems? Regards, Matthias Am 08.05.23 um 18:37 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: >> For those just now looking into this here is a link: >> https://docs.appimage.org/ >> If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly >> reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. > > I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) > ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. > > I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next > weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. > > It's basically the same as > https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
On 07/05/23 Dave Fisher wrote: For those just now looking into this here is a link: https://docs.appimage.org/ If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. I've done a recent build to produce an AppImage a few weeks (ahem..) ago, but I missed the final packaging and did not have time for it. I can complete it and put it somewehere on home.apache.org next weekend if anyone wishes to play with it. It's basically the same as https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hello Damjan, hello all the main problem for AOO to become part of a distribution is, that it isn't possible to build it along the distribution policy from source. I can say it especially for the Debian-based distributions. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 15.02.23 um 17:39 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:52 PM wrote: Hello GB Mac, Le 2023-02-15 06:36, GB Mac a écrit : OpenOffice remains a perpetual developer project in Linux. It's a problem to do with your Linux distribution (which you don't specify). See with them so that the DEB or RPM package is set online in their repositories. Both the technical and political reality of software installation on Linux, is that Linux distribution repositories never could have been, and never will be, the one and only source of software to install. Repositories legally cannot package commercial software for example, and as the (now obsolete) Autopackage project quite correctly noticed around 2005, and its founder Mike Hearn gave a talk about to Gentoo developers at some conference in those days, the Linux distributions' repository has a monopoly on easy software installation, which distributions use as a political weapon against software that they don't like, whether it isn't UNIX-y enough, or has a strange licence, or isn't popular enough, or they just don't like for some personal reason. And there is trouble in paradise even for packages that make it into a distro repository. Distributions often ship old versions, and update on an awkward schedule. Inkscape used to have a release schedule where new releases would come out shortly after Ubuntu releases. As a result they had to deal with endless duplicate bug reports, from Ubuntu users installing the old version, and reporting bugs that were already fixed, but with no easy way to install the new version. Eventually Inkscape changed its release schedule to allow Ubuntu to package its latest version, but you can see the problem with this: should tens of thousands of packages really be forced to release in lock-step with Ubuntu? So the problem of 3rd party software installation has plagued Linux since inception: I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. In bug 46333 users wanted an Autopackage of OpenOffice. Luckily in recent years the Linux distributions seem to have finally woken up, and begun officially supporting installation of 3rd party software, Ubuntu with Snap, and Red Hat with Flatpak. LibreOffice already offers Snap, Flatpak and AppImage, although I've found them to be of poor quality. Flatpak can work on Ubuntu too. AppImage isn't sandboxed at all. Snap is a disaster and will probably fail like most Canonical technologies. I definitely think Flatpak is the way to go. However it will require some development. We don't (only) use the standard GTK file dialogs, which automatically go through a "Portal" to allow us out of the sandbox, so we have to use the Portal API to gain permission to read the selected document somehow. Regards Damjan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
For those just now looking into this here is a link: https://docs.appimage.org/ If we switch to this packaging it appears that we can significantly reduce the many Linux packages we create when we release. Interesting. Best, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On May 7, 2023, at 9:39 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi All, > > Any news on this topic? > > If we want it to happen we need to work on it... > > Regards, > >Matthias > >> Am 21.03.23 um 16:19 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Hi All, >> >> Now that AOO 4.1.14 is released wouldn't it be the perfect time to start >> development on an AppImage (or similar)? >> >> Regards, >> >>Matthias >> >>> Am 18.02.23 um 13:48 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Am 15.02.23 um 18:05 schrieb Yury Tarasievich: On 15/02/2023 19:39, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them > in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. The document is a beaut, but you've excluded Flatpak and Snap, one of which you sort of condemn and one of which you recommend, nevertheless. Why not AppImage, for which half a work is already there, AFAIU ? (I mean `installed` method of packaging) So it hasn't got sandboxing. Is it such a big deal? >>> I don't think we need sandboxing in the first place. >>> >>> An easy to install package for Linux would be good, so maybe we can try >>> to do an Appimage package after the release of AOO 4.1.14? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>>Matthias >>> Also, any new packaging method would have to integrate into the existing build framework? Which isn't exactly a model of clarity and robustness? -Yury - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi All, Any news on this topic? If we want it to happen we need to work on it... Regards, Matthias Am 21.03.23 um 16:19 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi All, > > Now that AOO 4.1.14 is released wouldn't it be the perfect time to start > development on an AppImage (or similar)? > > Regards, > > Matthias > > Am 18.02.23 um 13:48 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Hi, >> >> Am 15.02.23 um 18:05 schrieb Yury Tarasievich: >>> On 15/02/2023 19:39, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >>> I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. >>> The document is a beaut, but you've excluded Flatpak and Snap, one of >>> which you sort of condemn and one of which you recommend, nevertheless. >>> >>> Why not AppImage, for which half a work is already there, AFAIU ? (I >>> mean `installed` method of packaging) So it hasn't got sandboxing. Is >>> it such a big deal? >> I don't think we need sandboxing in the first place. >> >> An easy to install package for Linux would be good, so maybe we can try >> to do an Appimage package after the release of AOO 4.1.14? >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >>> Also, any new packaging method would have to integrate into the >>> existing build framework? Which isn't exactly a model of clarity and >>> robustness? >>> >>> -Yury >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Installation of Linux OpenOffife on Chrome OS?
With YouTube, many tutorials about installation on ChromeOS x64 [1] For x86, don't work and we have an issue [2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_iXFRxFGPw [2] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127040 - Mail original - > De: "Keith N. McKenna" > À: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Envoyé: Mardi 21 Mars 2023 16:00:42 > Objet: Installation of Linux OpenOffife on Chrome OS? > > Greetings all > > > > > I received a misdirected question on the l10n moderators list asking > about AOO > running on Chrome OS. I know that most modern Chromebooks are capable > of > running Linux apps. Has anyone tried to install AOO on a Chromebook? > > > > > Regards > > Keith > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi All, Now that AOO 4.1.14 is released wouldn't it be the perfect time to start development on an AppImage (or similar)? Regards, Matthias Am 18.02.23 um 13:48 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi, > > Am 15.02.23 um 18:05 schrieb Yury Tarasievich: >> On 15/02/2023 19:39, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >> >>> I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them >>> in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. >> The document is a beaut, but you've excluded Flatpak and Snap, one of >> which you sort of condemn and one of which you recommend, nevertheless. >> >> Why not AppImage, for which half a work is already there, AFAIU ? (I >> mean `installed` method of packaging) So it hasn't got sandboxing. Is >> it such a big deal? > I don't think we need sandboxing in the first place. > > An easy to install package for Linux would be good, so maybe we can try > to do an Appimage package after the release of AOO 4.1.14? > > Regards, > > Matthias > >> Also, any new packaging method would have to integrate into the >> existing build framework? Which isn't exactly a model of clarity and >> robustness? >> >> -Yury >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Installation of Linux OpenOffife on Chrome OS?
I have not tried AOO but LibreOffice runs fine on a ChromeBook once the Linux subsystem is activated from Settings. The easiest way to install it is to put the AppImage in the linux folder of the internal drive (I actually have an Applications sub-folder as I have a bunch of other AppImages installed) and then double-click on it from the Files app. It nicely with the desktop and appears as a native application. I used to install with the Linux installer but the AppImage is so much easier. HTH Simon On Tue, 21 Mar 2023, 15:01 Keith N. McKenna, wrote: > Greetings all > > > > > I received a misdirected question on the l10n moderators list asking about > AOO > running on Chrome OS. I know that most modern Chromebooks are capable of > running Linux apps. Has anyone tried to install AOO on a Chromebook? > > > > > Regards > > Keith >
Installation of Linux OpenOffife on Chrome OS?
Greetings all I received a misdirected question on the l10n moderators list asking about AOO running on Chrome OS. I know that most modern Chromebooks are capable of running Linux apps. Has anyone tried to install AOO on a Chromebook? Regards Keith
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi, Am 15.02.23 um 18:05 schrieb Yury Tarasievich: > On 15/02/2023 19:39, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > >> I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them >> in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. > > The document is a beaut, but you've excluded Flatpak and Snap, one of > which you sort of condemn and one of which you recommend, nevertheless. > > Why not AppImage, for which half a work is already there, AFAIU ? (I > mean `installed` method of packaging) So it hasn't got sandboxing. Is > it such a big deal? I don't think we need sandboxing in the first place. An easy to install package for Linux would be good, so maybe we can try to do an Appimage package after the release of AOO 4.1.14? Regards, Matthias > > Also, any new packaging method would have to integrate into the > existing build framework? Which isn't exactly a model of clarity and > robustness? > > -Yury > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
On 15/02/2023 19:39, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. The document is a beaut, but you've excluded Flatpak and Snap, one of which you sort of condemn and one of which you recommend, nevertheless. Why not AppImage, for which half a work is already there, AFAIU ? (I mean `installed` method of packaging) So it hasn't got sandboxing. Is it such a big deal? Also, any new packaging method would have to integrate into the existing build framework? Which isn't exactly a model of clarity and robustness? -Yury - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:52 PM wrote: > Hello GB Mac, > > Le 2023-02-15 06:36, GB Mac a écrit : > > OpenOffice remains a perpetual > > developer project in Linux. > It's a problem to do with your Linux distribution (which you don't > specify). > See with them so that the DEB or RPM package is set online in their > repositories. > > Both the technical and political reality of software installation on Linux, is that Linux distribution repositories never could have been, and never will be, the one and only source of software to install. Repositories legally cannot package commercial software for example, and as the (now obsolete) Autopackage project quite correctly noticed around 2005, and its founder Mike Hearn gave a talk about to Gentoo developers at some conference in those days, the Linux distributions' repository has a monopoly on easy software installation, which distributions use as a political weapon against software that they don't like, whether it isn't UNIX-y enough, or has a strange licence, or isn't popular enough, or they just don't like for some personal reason. And there is trouble in paradise even for packages that make it into a distro repository. Distributions often ship old versions, and update on an awkward schedule. Inkscape used to have a release schedule where new releases would come out shortly after Ubuntu releases. As a result they had to deal with endless duplicate bug reports, from Ubuntu users installing the old version, and reporting bugs that were already fixed, but with no easy way to install the new version. Eventually Inkscape changed its release schedule to allow Ubuntu to package its latest version, but you can see the problem with this: should tens of thousands of packages really be forced to release in lock-step with Ubuntu? So the problem of 3rd party software installation has plagued Linux since inception: I documented 8 projects that tried to achieve that and compared them in the attached spreadsheet, and there are more. In bug 46333 users wanted an Autopackage of OpenOffice. Luckily in recent years the Linux distributions seem to have finally woken up, and begun officially supporting installation of 3rd party software, Ubuntu with Snap, and Red Hat with Flatpak. LibreOffice already offers Snap, Flatpak and AppImage, although I've found them to be of poor quality. Flatpak can work on Ubuntu too. AppImage isn't sandboxed at all. Snap is a disaster and will probably fail like most Canonical technologies. I definitely think Flatpak is the way to go. However it will require some development. We don't (only) use the standard GTK file dialogs, which automatically go through a "Portal" to allow us out of the sandbox, so we have to use the Portal API to gain permission to read the selected document somehow. Regards Damjan 3rd party software installation.ods Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.spreadsheet - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi Graeme Thank you for the kind words. We do agree it is good to have an Open Source alternative. The installation is indeed not user friendly (requires to unpack and execute a command line instruction). Unfortunately we do not have a volunteer to implement an installer. This is something that would indeed increase the visibility of the program under Linux (although that is not the primary AOO user platform). Let's hope there is a volunteer who would like to scratch this itch ;) All the best, Pedro > On 02/15/2023 5:36 AM WET GB Mac wrote: > > > Hi, > > First I would like to thank everyone who makes OpenOffice available, it > is appreciated to have a LibreOffice alternative in the open source world. > > Second I would like to say the installation process is a large barrier > to general uptake of the software. The fact that there are no simple, single > file, ready to install package makes this a niche power user project as > opposed to something that is truly accessible to everyone. The software is > likely great, I used it back in my Windows days and it was nice to have, but > in Linux it's only a couple of notches simpler than building it from source > code.Yes, many of us could do it but most don't because it's a pain in > the butt and this ensures that LibreOffice wins and OpenOffice remains a > perpetual developer project in Linux. I'm writing this because I like > OpenOffice, I like Apache and it's unfortunate that it's as inaccessible as > it is. Please fix this and OpenOffice could actually become popular in > Linux if that's the goal. > > Thanks. > > -Grahame - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hi all, It is not an easy step to get AOO (back) into a distribution... A better way would be to use alternative packaging formats: https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ But, as always, it needs someone to do the work. This is a volunteers project, so every help is welcome! Regards, Matthias Am 15.02.23 um 13:51 schrieb club.a...@free.fr: > Hello GB Mac, > > Le 2023-02-15 06:36, GB Mac a écrit : >> OpenOffice remains a perpetual >> developer project in Linux. > It's a problem to do with your Linux distribution (which you don't > specify). > See with them so that the DEB or RPM package is set online in their > repositories. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: User Installation Process Feedback
Hello GB Mac, Le 2023-02-15 06:36, GB Mac a écrit : OpenOffice remains a perpetual developer project in Linux. It's a problem to do with your Linux distribution (which you don't specify). See with them so that the DEB or RPM package is set online in their repositories. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
User Installation Process Feedback
Hi, First I would like to thank everyone who makes OpenOffice available, it is appreciated to have a LibreOffice alternative in the open source world. Second I would like to say the installation process is a large barrier to general uptake of the software. The fact that there are no simple, single file, ready to install package makes this a niche power user project as opposed to something that is truly accessible to everyone. The software is likely great, I used it back in my Windows days and it was nice to have, but in Linux it's only a couple of notches simpler than building it from source code. Yes, many of us could do it but most don't because it's a pain in the butt and this ensures that LibreOffice wins and OpenOffice remains a perpetual developer project in Linux. I'm writing this because I like OpenOffice, I like Apache and it's unfortunate that it's as inaccessible as it is. Please fix this and OpenOffice could actually become popular in Linux if that's the goal. Thanks. -Grahame
Re: Frage zur Installation von OpenOffice
Hallo Johannes, > Am 2022-12-14 um 12:15 schrieb Johannes Köthke : > > Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, wir sind in diesem Forum nicht so förmlich. > Ich habe soeben OpenOffice installiert. Beim Entpacken kann man einen > Zielordner wählen. Ich hoffe, dass Du OpenOffice von dieser Seite heruntergeladen hast: https://www.openoffice.org/de/download/ > Da ich diesen ungern auf meinem Desktop (ist als > Standard voreingestellt) haben möchte, habe ich extra dafür einen neuen > Ordner erstellt. Diesen habe ich "OpenOffice" genannt. Zu meiner > Überraschung wird jedoch "Neuer Ordner" angezeigt und auch dahin entpackt. > Mein neu erstellter Ordner "OpenOffice" wurde zusätzlich auch erstellt, nur > ist dieser leer. Also habe ich den leeren "OpenOffice" Ordner gelöscht und > den "Neuer Ordner" umbenannt in "OpenOffice". > Meine Frage: Ist das so ok oder kann es diesbezüglich zu Problemen mit der > Software kommen? Da im Allgemeinen das Betriebssystem für das Zuordnen von Dateien zuständig ist, "weiß" Dein genutztes Betriebssystem folglich, dass Du den Ordner umbenannt hast, wodurch keine Probleme auftauchen dürften. Leider hast Du nicht mitgeteilt, welches Betriebssystem Du nutzt, weshalb ich nur ins Blaue hinein argumentieren kann. Probiere einfach aus, ob das Aufrufen von OpenOffice funktioniert und ob erstellte und gesicherte Dateien durch Doppelklick automatisch von OpenOffice geöffnet werden. Wenn alles klappt, dann stimmt meine Vermutung. Wenn nicht, musst Du bei der Nachfrage ein wenig konkreter werden und zumindest das Betriebssystem inklusive Versionsnummer angeben. > Als Alternative bleibt sonst wohl nur das Deinstallieren und ein erneutes > Installieren? Nicht unbedingt. Wie gesagt: Probiere mal alles aus, was Du machen möchtest. Falls Unerwartetes auftaucht, meldest Du Dich wieder in diesem Forum. Grüße Günter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-de-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-de-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Frage zur Installation von OpenOffice
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, Ich habe soeben OpenOffice installiert. Beim Entpacken kann man einen Zielordner wählen. Da ich diesen ungern auf meinem Desktop (ist als Standard voreingestellt) haben möchte, habe ich extra dafür einen neuen Ordner erstellt. Diesen habe ich "OpenOffice" genannt. Zu meiner Überraschung wird jedoch "Neuer Ordner" angezeigt und auch dahin entpackt. Mein neu erstellter Ordner "OpenOffice" wurde zusätzlich auch erstellt, nur ist dieser leer. Also habe ich den leeren "OpenOffice" Ordner gelöscht und den "Neuer Ordner" umbenannt in "OpenOffice". Meine Frage: Ist das so ok oder kann es diesbezüglich zu Problemen mit der Software kommen? Als Alternative bleibt sonst wohl nur das Deinstallieren und ein erneutes Installieren? Vielen Dank für Ihre Hilfe und mit freundlichen Grüßen verbleibend, Johannes Köthke
Re: Installation
The instructions in the following forum tutorial may be a little easier for Linux novices: https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50119 Regards, Francis On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 12:21 PM Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi, > > NG talked about making the instructions for installing AOO on Linux more > clear for the end user. > E.g. "cd" could be explained as "change to the directory". That's > something we should think about... > > However, since AOO is not part of any repository (I know of) it now has > to be installed by hand. > > This is a headache, given the numerous distributions and desktop > environments. It may be even more stressful when "another" Office > package is already installed as default. > > Andrea Pescetti had an interesting talk at FOSDEM 2022 about Linux > packaging: > > https://fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ > > If we want to have an "easy to install" package for Linux we need to do > something in this respect. > > Otherwise AOO will remain with 1-2% users that download for Linux. > > Regards, > >Matthias > > Am 08.07.22 um 20:05 schrieb Dr. Michael Stehmann: > > Hello, > > > > NG talked about a GNU/Linux user who wants to install RPM or deb > > packages. > > > > Linux != Windows and Linux is not a Windows for poors. It is free as > > in free speech not as in free beer. > > > > If you want to use a Free Software operating system you can't expect, > > that the developers want to infantilize or domineer over you. > > > > So you have to make your own decisions and that means you have to learn. > > > > And one of the first thinks you have to learn is using the command > > line and the package tools of the distribution of your choice. > > > > And 'cd' is one of the first lessons you have to learn (right after > > 'man' ;-) ). > > > > If you don't want to learn: No problem: You will find people you can > > pay for installing AOO on your computer. > > > > Freedom may be stressfull, but people developing Free Software should > > not offer bondage. > > > > Kind regards > > Michael > >
Re: Installation
Hi, NG talked about making the instructions for installing AOO on Linux more clear for the end user. E.g. "cd" could be explained as "change to the directory". That's something we should think about... However, since AOO is not part of any repository (I know of) it now has to be installed by hand. This is a headache, given the numerous distributions and desktop environments. It may be even more stressful when "another" Office package is already installed as default. Andrea Pescetti had an interesting talk at FOSDEM 2022 about Linux packaging: https://fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/openoffice_linux_packaging/ If we want to have an "easy to install" package for Linux we need to do something in this respect. Otherwise AOO will remain with 1-2% users that download for Linux. Regards, Matthias Am 08.07.22 um 20:05 schrieb Dr. Michael Stehmann: > Hello, > > NG talked about a GNU/Linux user who wants to install RPM or deb > packages. > > Linux != Windows and Linux is not a Windows for poors. It is free as > in free speech not as in free beer. > > If you want to use a Free Software operating system you can't expect, > that the developers want to infantilize or domineer over you. > > So you have to make your own decisions and that means you have to learn. > > And one of the first thinks you have to learn is using the command > line and the package tools of the distribution of your choice. > > And 'cd' is one of the first lessons you have to learn (right after > 'man' ;-) ). > > If you don't want to learn: No problem: You will find people you can > pay for installing AOO on your computer. > > Freedom may be stressfull, but people developing Free Software should > not offer bondage. > > Kind regards > Michael smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Installation
Hello, NG talked about a GNU/Linux user who wants to install RPM or deb packages. Linux != Windows and Linux is not a Windows for poors. It is free as in free speech not as in free beer. If you want to use a Free Software operating system you can't expect, that the developers want to infantilize or domineer over you. So you have to make your own decisions and that means you have to learn. And one of the first thinks you have to learn is using the command line and the package tools of the distribution of your choice. And 'cd' is one of the first lessons you have to learn (right after 'man' ;-) ). If you don't want to learn: No problem: You will find people you can pay for installing AOO on your computer. Freedom may be stressfull, but people developing Free Software should not offer bondage. Kind regards Michael OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Installation
At 12:19 08/07/2022 -0400, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Brian Barker wrote: At 15:21 08/07/2022 +0200, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: Am 08.07.22 um 13:22 schrieb NG: "2. cd into the DEBS or RPMS subdirectory of the installation directory. 'cd' does the same in DOS like it does in unix like operation systems. Does anyone still use DOS?! The original question was about migration from Windows. Windows users do not type commands: they have grown up since those days. Brian Barker Today it is called the Command Prompt ... Er, I know that. ... and I do use it regularly to do an administrative install of AOO to do QA on changes to verify a bur, or bugs were solved. Yes: *you* do - and Linux users apparently need to. But the average Windows user does everything they need without resorting to command prompts and typing commands. The original question was about (average?) Windows users not knowing what "cd" meant or how to use it. What happens in DOS is hardly relevant. Here's a couple of thoughts: When you have composed a new e-mail message on your mobile phone, (1) how do you bring up a command prompt, and (2) what command do you then type in order to send the message? When using the self check-out at the supermarket, how do you bring up a command prompt - and indeed a Qwerty keyboard - in order to type "415g Heinz Beanz Baked Beans"? Windows is as grown-up as these other modern devices. The audience for the installation instructions being discussed is likely to be people who simply don't need to type commands in their lives. Brian Barker - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation
Brian Barker wrote: At 15:21 08/07/2022 +0200, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: Am 08.07.22 um 13:22 schrieb NG: "2. cd into the DEBS or RPMS subdirectory of the installation directory. 'cd' does the same in DOS like it does in unix like operation systems. Does anyone still use DOS?! The original question was about migration from Windows. Windows users do not type commands: they have grown up since those days. Brian Barker Brian; Today it is called the Command Prompt and I do use it regularly to do an administrative install of AOO to do QA on changes to verify a bur, or bugs were solved. Regards Keith - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation
At 15:21 08/07/2022 +0200, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: Am 08.07.22 um 13:22 schrieb NG: "2. cd into the DEBS or RPMS subdirectory of the installation directory. 'cd' does the same in DOS like it does in unix like operation systems. Does anyone still use DOS?! The original question was about migration from Windows. Windows users do not type commands: they have grown up since those days. Brian Barker - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation
Hello, just some remarks: Am 08.07.22 um 13:22 schrieb NG: Hello, "2. cd into the DEBS or RPMS subdirectory of the installation directory. You should see a lot of debs here and one sub-directory called "desktop-integration"." A novice new to Linux is unlikely to know what "cd" means, 'cd' does the same in DOS like it does in unix like operation systems. A much easier way to install quickly and effortlessly is by using "Discover", which should be the default installation app in all distros! In Debian 'discover' is hardware identification system. See https://wiki.debian.org/discover Kind regards Michael OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Installation
Hello, I'm writing in the hope the dev team will take notice of my feedback, and hopefully change the instructions for novice Linux users who are not geeks, have no intention of ever becoming one and would appreciate installations as easy as clicking on an exe file, especially if they've migrated from Windows, which is the case for many people as Linux is still not widely known, and if people have heard of it, the perception is it's by geeks for geeks, which your instructions confirm! "2. cd into the DEBS or RPMS subdirectory of the installation directory. You should see a lot of debs here and one sub-directory called "desktop-integration"." A novice new to Linux is unlikely to know what "cd" means, nor what he/she is supposed to do and even less how to get to the DEBS or RPMS directory as was my case in the beginning! Having to spend hours trying to understand what such instructions mean will more than likely result in them giving up, or try a different app with more user-friendly installation, or use the one included in whichever distro they've opted for, which nowadays is predominantly Libre Office, which is what I ended up doing for a long time. A much easier way to install quickly and effortlessly is by using "Discover", which should be the default installation app in all distros! Here is all a novice has to do for Linux DEB-based installation: 1. download Apache OpenOffice tar.gz package; 2. extract all files in the tar.gz package with Ark (easily installed with Discover) and select "open destination folder after extraction"; 3. open "DEBS" then "desktop-integration" double click on "openoffice4.1-debian-menus_4.1.12-9809_all" this will automatically launch Discover; 4. click on "install" enter root password, OpenOffice will appear in Application Menu "Office" ready for use, simple! I don't know whether this method works with non DEB-based distros as I've never used such distros... Regards, G - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Bootstrap Problem in OpenOffice.Org 4.1.8 Installation
Dear Hao Wang, On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:47:06AM +, Hao Wang wrote: > Dear Developers, > > I got stuck with the './bootstrap' part of installation when the > script tried to download mythes. Is it possible to download and > install all the packages outside of the bootstrap script using other > installation repository ? External dependencies are listed in file main/external_deps.lst You should be able to understand the syntax easily, for the bits that are interesting for you. In particular, the file you are having problems with should be downloaded from: https://sourceforge.net/projects/hunspell/files/MyThes/1.2.0/mythes-1.2.0.tar.gz Files are saved into directory ext_sources and are renamed, adding their MD5 checksum before the actual name. That file must thus be saved as ext_sources/067201ea8b126597670b5eff72e1f66c-mythes-1.2.0.tar.gz If you know Perl, and wanted to debug into the problem, the responsible script is main/solenv/bin/download_external_dependencies.pl. I hope this helps. Best regards, -- Arrigo http://rigo.altervista.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Bootstrap Problem in OpenOffice.Org 4.1.8 Installation
Dear Developers, I got stuck with the './bootstrap' part of installation when the script tried to download mythes. Is it possible to download and install all the packages outside of the bootstrap script using other installation repository ? Best Regards, Hao Wang
Re: Fehler bei Installation
Am 27.06.19 um 23:13 schrieb Peter Bialaschik: Fehlermeldung : Windows Installer nicht gefunden | Problembeschreibung | Ersetze diesen Text und beschreibe das Problem (Was funktioniert nicht? Was wird erwartet?) | | Browser Variablen | Werte | I've downloaded a second ago and haven't seen a problem. So, in general it's working. When you have problems with specific mirror servers then just change them. On the SourceForge webpage there is a grey "Problems Downloading?" button. Just click on it and choose a different mirror from the popup dialog. HTH Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fehler bei Installation
Am 27.06.19 um 23:13 schrieb Peter Bialaschik: Fehlermeldung : Windows Installer nicht gefunden | Problembeschreibung | Ersetze diesen Text und beschreibe das Problem (Was funktioniert nicht? Was wird erwartet?) | | Browser Variablen | Werte | I've downloaded a second ago and haven't seen a problem. So, in general it's working. When you have problems with specific mirror servers then just change them. On the SourceForge webpage there is a grey "Problems Downloading?" button. Just click on it and choose a different mirror from the popup dialog. HTH Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fehler bei Installation
Hallo, German answer: Dies ist eine englischsprachige Entwickler ailing Liste. Ihr Problem ist spezifisch zu Ihrem System. Bitte benutzen Sie ein Forum https://www.openoffice.org/de/foren.html Beste Grüß Petko English translation: This is a English speaking development mailing list. Your issue is generik to your system. Please use a forum from this link (German) https://www.openoffice.org/de/foren.html All the best Petko Am 27. Juni 2019 23:13:38 MESZ schrieb Peter Bialaschik : >Fehlermeldung : Windows Installer nicht gefunden > >BialaschikPeter >bialaschikpe...@aol.com > >Vielen Dank für die Hilfe > > >| Problembeschreibung | Ersetze diesen Text und beschreibe das Problem > >(Was funktioniert nicht? Was wird erwartet?) | >| Browser Variablen | Werte | >| navigator.appCodeName | Mozilla | >| navigator.appName | Netscape | >| navigator.appVersion | 5.0 (Windows) | >| navigator.platform | Win32 | >| navigator.oscpu | Windows NT 6.0; WOW64 | >| navigator.cpuClass | undefined | >| navigator.product | Gecko | >| navigator.productSub | 20100101 | >| navigator.vendor | > | >| navigator.vendorSub | > | >| navigator.language | de | >| navigator.browserLanguage | undefined | >| navigator.userLanguage | undefined | >| navigator.systemLanguage | undefined | >| navigator.userAgent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) >Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 | >| Debian / Ubuntu / IceWeasel ? | Nein / Nein / Nein | >| Stabiles Release | | >| JavaScript Funktionen/Variablen | Werte | >| Language ISO code | > | >| Language ISO code (from select box) | > | >| Release matrix platform position (full) | > | >| Release matrix platform position (lp) | > | >| Release matrix platform array data | > | >| Release matrix language array data | > | >| UI platform name | > | >| UI platform name (not supported) | > | >| Platform (short) | > | >| URL platform name (full) | > | >| URL platform name (lp) | > | >| URL platform name (from select box) | > | >| Version (from select box) | > | >| File name (full) | > | >| File name (lp) | > | >| File extension | > | >| File size (full) (MByte) | > | >| File size (lp) (MByte) | > | >| Release info | > | >| Download file link (full) | > | >| Download file link (lp) | > | >| Checksum file link (full) (here for MD5) | > | >| Checksum file link (lp) (here for MD5) | > | >| Base URL to Sourceforge.net | > | >| Base URL to Apache Archive | > | >| getLinkSelection() (download URL) | > | >| isLanguageSupported() (true/false) ? | > | >| Show the sub-box (true/false) ? | > | >| General error (true/false) ? > > > > | > | > > > >Mit freundlichen Grüßen > >Peter Bialaschik >Rosseler Str. 3, >66127 Saarbrücken >Tel. 0176 249 40 934 > Ema >il: bialaschikpe...@aol.com -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
Fehler bei Installation
Fehlermeldung : Windows Installer nicht gefunden BialaschikPeter bialaschikpe...@aol.com Vielen Dank für die Hilfe | Problembeschreibung | Ersetze diesen Text und beschreibe das Problem (Was funktioniert nicht? Was wird erwartet?) | | Browser Variablen | Werte | | navigator.appCodeName | Mozilla | | navigator.appName | Netscape | | navigator.appVersion | 5.0 (Windows) | | navigator.platform | Win32 | | navigator.oscpu | Windows NT 6.0; WOW64 | | navigator.cpuClass | undefined | | navigator.product | Gecko | | navigator.productSub | 20100101 | | navigator.vendor | | | navigator.vendorSub | | | navigator.language | de | | navigator.browserLanguage | undefined | | navigator.userLanguage | undefined | | navigator.systemLanguage | undefined | | navigator.userAgent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 | | Debian / Ubuntu / IceWeasel ? | Nein / Nein / Nein | | Stabiles Release | | | JavaScript Funktionen/Variablen | Werte | | Language ISO code | | | Language ISO code (from select box) | | | Release matrix platform position (full) | | | Release matrix platform position (lp) | | | Release matrix platform array data | | | Release matrix language array data | | | UI platform name | | | UI platform name (not supported) | | | Platform (short) | | | URL platform name (full) | | | URL platform name (lp) | | | URL platform name (from select box) | | | Version (from select box) | | | File name (full) | | | File name (lp) | | | File extension | | | File size (full) (MByte) | | | File size (lp) (MByte) | | | Release info | | | Download file link (full) | | | Download file link (lp) | | | Checksum file link (full) (here for MD5) | | | Checksum file link (lp) (here for MD5) | | | Base URL to Sourceforge.net | | | Base URL to Apache Archive | | | getLinkSelection() (download URL) | | | isLanguageSupported() (true/false) ? | | | Show the sub-box (true/false) ? | | | General error (true/false) ? | | Mit freundlichen Grüßen Peter Bialaschik Rosseler Str. 3, 66127 Saarbrücken Tel. 0176 249 40 934 Ema il: bialaschikpe...@aol.com
4.1.6_release_blocker granted: [Issue 116363] Do not stretch Logo in Installation Wizard
Peter has granted Pedro 's request for 4.1.6_release_blocker: Issue 116363: Do not stretch Logo in Installation Wizard https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=116363 --- Comment #20 from Peter --- Blocker accepted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.6_release_blocker requested: [Issue 116363] Do not stretch Logo in Installation Wizard
Pedro has asked for 4.1.6_release_blocker: Issue 116363: Do not stretch Logo in Installation Wizard https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=116363 --- Comment #19 from Pedro --- Verified fixed in Rev. 1842364 under Windows 7 x64 Pro at 125% Text size See attached images of Before (125%_stretched.png) and After (125%_fixed.png) Thank you Matthias! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Openoffice installation on Mac PC
On 26/04/2017 Jim Jagielski wrote: BTW, if we do have some signing capability suitable for the App Store, could someone share that info for me for my AOO 4.1.4 builds. You will find several discussions about this in the list archive, but in short there is no process; the closest we ever got was (for Windows) when we had time to sit down with Infra at ApacheCon, so this would be the best occasion for you to actually get this done. Also note: last time we discussed it on this list, it turned out there is a substantial difference between pleasing GateKeeper (which would be enough for us) and getting OpenOffice into the App Store, so pleasing GateKeeper would already be very good progress. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Openoffice installation on Mac PC
BTW, if we do have some signing capability suitable for the App Store, could someone share that info for me for my AOO 4.1.4 builds. tia. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Openoffice installation on Mac PC
See this post: https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17=87668 - Mail original - De: "Noman Ahmad" <n.ah...@hotmail.com> À: dev@openoffice.apache.org Envoyé: Mercredi 12 Avril 2017 07:08:13 Objet: Openoffice installation on Mac PC “OpenOffice” can’t be opened because it is from an unidentified developer. Your security preferences allow installation of only apps from the Mac App Store and identified developers. “OpenOffice” is on the disk image “Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg”. Safari downloaded this disk image today at 10:02 PM from sourceforge.net. Problem description Exchange this text to describe the problem (What does not work? What do you expect?) Browser variables Values navigator.appCodeName Mozilla navigator.appName Netscape navigator.appVersion5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5) AppleWebKit/603.1.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.1 Safari/603.1.30 navigator.platform MacIntel navigator.oscpu undefined navigator.cpuClass undefined navigator.product Gecko navigator.productSub20030107 navigator.vendorApple Computer, Inc. navigator.vendorSub navigator.language en-US navigator.browserLanguage undefined navigator.userLanguage undefined navigator.systemLanguageundefined navigator.userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5) AppleWebKit/603.1.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.1 Safari/603.1.30 Debian / Ubuntu / IceWeasel ? No / No / No Stable Release JavaScript functions/variables Values Language ISO code en-US Language ISO code (from select box) en-US Release matrix platform position (full) 9 Release matrix platform position (lp) 10 Release matrix platform array data y,163 Release matrix language array data en-US,English (US),English (US),y,download/index.html UI platform nameOS X (version >= 10.7) (DMG) UI platform name (not supported) Platform (short)mac64 URL platform name (full)MacOS_x86-64_install URL platform name (lp) MacOS_x86-64_langpack URL platform name (from select box) mac64 Version (from select box) 4.1.3 File name (full)Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg File name (lp) Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg File extension .dmg File size (full) (MByte)163 File size (lp) (MByte) 17 Release infoMilestone AOO413m1 | Build ID 9783 | SVN r1761381 | Released 2016-10-12 Download file link (full) https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg/download Download file link (lp) https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg/download Checksum file link (full) (here for MD5) https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg.md5 Checksum file link (lp) (here for MD5) https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg.md5 Base URL to Sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/ Base URL to Apache Archive https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3 getLinkSelection() (download URL) undefined isLanguageSupported() (true/false) ?true Show the sub-box (true/false) ? true General error (true/false) ?false - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Openoffice installation on Mac PC
“OpenOffice” can’t be opened because it is from an unidentified developer. Your security preferences allow installation of only apps from the Mac App Store and identified developers. “OpenOffice” is on the disk image “Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg”. Safari downloaded this disk image today at 10:02 PM from sourceforge.net. Problem description Exchange this text to describe the problem (What does not work? What do you expect?) Browser variables Values navigator.appCodeName Mozilla navigator.appName Netscape navigator.appVersion5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5) AppleWebKit/603.1.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.1 Safari/603.1.30 navigator.platform MacIntel navigator.oscpu undefined navigator.cpuClass undefined navigator.product Gecko navigator.productSub20030107 navigator.vendorApple Computer, Inc. navigator.vendorSub navigator.language en-US navigator.browserLanguage undefined navigator.userLanguage undefined navigator.systemLanguageundefined navigator.userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5) AppleWebKit/603.1.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.1 Safari/603.1.30 Debian / Ubuntu / IceWeasel ? No / No / No Stable Release JavaScript functions/variables Values Language ISO code en-US Language ISO code (from select box) en-US Release matrix platform position (full) 9 Release matrix platform position (lp) 10 Release matrix platform array data y,163 Release matrix language array data en-US,English (US),English (US),y,download/index.html UI platform nameOS X (version >= 10.7) (DMG) UI platform name (not supported) Platform (short)mac64 URL platform name (full)MacOS_x86-64_install URL platform name (lp) MacOS_x86-64_langpack URL platform name (from select box) mac64 Version (from select box) 4.1.3 File name (full)Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg File name (lp) Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg File extension .dmg File size (full) (MByte)163 File size (lp) (MByte) 17 Release infoMilestone AOO413m1 | Build ID 9783 | SVN r1761381 | Released 2016-10-12 Download file link (full) https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg/download Download file link (lp) https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg/download Checksum file link (full) (here for MD5) https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg.md5 Checksum file link (lp) (here for MD5) https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.3_MacOS_x86-64_langpack_en-US.dmg.md5 Base URL to Sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.1.3/binaries/ Base URL to Apache Archive https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.1.3 getLinkSelection() (download URL) undefined isLanguageSupported() (true/false) ?true Show the sub-box (true/false) ? true General error (true/false) ?false
RE: [DISCUSS] Places for Installation, Startup, Troubleshooting, Caveats, Tips, Workarounds, and maybe FAQ?
Still ... > [BCC to dev and users lists - please keep the conversation on doc@ for > now, at least by BCC, since it pertains to use of the wiki(s).] Of course, I could simply be over-thinking this whole thing and it would be more valuable to do something. I still would like any feedback that there is before investing in something like this. The need for development of hotfix procedures for end-users led me to elevate this lingering topic of mine for discussion. I regret not anticipating the need for better information for situations like that and user trouble-shooting as well. - Dennis > -Original Message- > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 10:34 > To: d...@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] Places for Installation, Startup, Troubleshooting, > Caveats, Tips, Workarounds, and maybe FAQ? > > > I notice that the User Guide draft does not provide connection to topics > around installation, startup, and so on, at least not at the top level, > <https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/UserGuide>. > > The Apache OpenOffice Documentation Project page is project descriptive, > rather than documentation descriptive, > at <https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation>. This page has a > mix of old and somewhat recent material and a variety of formats and > works-in-progress. > > I am particularly interested, myself, in information about installation, > start up, ways of starting work with documents, saving and locating > documents, tips for configuring for careful and systematic operation as > well as trouble-shooting, working-around common problems, and > limitations to be known about. I am also interested in that information > being well-illustrated. My priority, by the way, is Windows first, > since that represents over 85% of our user community measured by > download statistics. > > These don't seem to be part of the User Guide project but there are a > variety of places where better information could be provided. > > It seems to me that there are three ways to have the supporting > documentation address this. > > 1. Add a section to the user guide for covering Installation, > Configuration, Operation, Troubleshooting, and Removal. It would need > to deal with separation of the different platforms (and their versions) > in some clean way so that users on a particular platform can find what > is pertinent to them and requires knowing their computer operating- > system when it is not the same for all platforms. It would also need to > deal with differences in AOO version functionality/caveats in some > manner. > > 2. Use the current structure and update and add the information that > seems to be important for providing the kind of documentation support I > am speaking of, employing/expanding HOWTOs and the Frequently Asked > Questions to tie into such material. > > 3. Maybe some combination, although cross-referencing might not serve > users well unless it is smooth and frictionless (especially around users > not losing their place based on what they are looking into). > > Down the road, I would think it would be good to move The Documentation > Project to a DocumentationProject wiki topic, and have current relevant > documentation at the Documentation topic. Older material about > unsupported software could move to a separate topic page > (PreviousDocumentation ?) and cleaned up, and be accessible from the > top-level Documentation topic. > > Is there some coordination required about this, so that things don't be > left in a broken, disconnected state? I think the material could be > migrated in a way that keeps everything connected even as material is > morphed into a new structure. > > - Dennis > > PS: I notice there were no responses to this question about how inter- > version changes or specific-version items are identified. > > PPS: Something else that needs to be done is cleanup around what is > under PDL and what is not. I would thing that needs to be attended to in > separation of Apache Licensed material and anything that must be > retained under PDL. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > > Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 18:17 > > To: d...@openoffice.apache.org > > Subject: [QUESTIONS] Dealing with AOO Inter-Version Changes > > > > I notice that there is checking of documentation against current > > releases of Apache OpenOffice, although that does not seem to be > > reflected in the texts themselves, once User Guide pages are > designated > > as stable/"published". > > > > I know there were a couple of behavioral
[DISCUSS] Places for Installation, Startup, Troubleshooting, Caveats, Tips, Workarounds, and maybe FAQ?
[BCC to dev and users lists - please keep the conversation on doc@ for now, at least by BCC, since it pertains to use of the wiki(s).] I notice that the User Guide draft does not provide connection to topics around installation, startup, and so on, at least not at the top level, <https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/UserGuide>. The Apache OpenOffice Documentation Project page is project descriptive, rather than documentation descriptive, at <https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation>. This page has a mix of old and somewhat recent material and a variety of formats and works-in-progress. I am particularly interested, myself, in information about installation, start up, ways of starting work with documents, saving and locating documents, tips for configuring for careful and systematic operation as well as trouble-shooting, working-around common problems, and limitations to be known about. I am also interested in that information being well-illustrated. My priority, by the way, is Windows first, since that represents over 85% of our user community measured by download statistics. These don't seem to be part of the User Guide project but there are a variety of places where better information could be provided. It seems to me that there are three ways to have the supporting documentation address this. 1. Add a section to the user guide for covering Installation, Configuration, Operation, Troubleshooting, and Removal. It would need to deal with separation of the different platforms (and their versions) in some clean way so that users on a particular platform can find what is pertinent to them and requires knowing their computer operating-system when it is not the same for all platforms. It would also need to deal with differences in AOO version functionality/caveats in some manner. 2. Use the current structure and update and add the information that seems to be important for providing the kind of documentation support I am speaking of, employing/expanding HOWTOs and the Frequently Asked Questions to tie into such material. 3. Maybe some combination, although cross-referencing might not serve users well unless it is smooth and frictionless (especially around users not losing their place based on what they are looking into). Down the road, I would think it would be good to move The Documentation Project to a DocumentationProject wiki topic, and have current relevant documentation at the Documentation topic. Older material about unsupported software could move to a separate topic page (PreviousDocumentation ?) and cleaned up, and be accessible from the top-level Documentation topic. Is there some coordination required about this, so that things don't be left in a broken, disconnected state? I think the material could be migrated in a way that keeps everything connected even as material is morphed into a new structure. - Dennis PS: I notice there were no responses to this question about how inter-version changes or specific-version items are identified. PPS: Something else that needs to be done is cleanup around what is under PDL and what is not. I would thing that needs to be attended to in separation of Apache Licensed material and anything that must be retained under PDL. > -Original Message- > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 18:17 > To: d...@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: [QUESTIONS] Dealing with AOO Inter-Version Changes > > I notice that there is checking of documentation against current > releases of Apache OpenOffice, although that does not seem to be > reflected in the texts themselves, once User Guide pages are designated > as stable/"published". > > I know there were a couple of behavioral changes in AOO 4.1.2 although > that might not show at the current level of documentation detail. > > I wonder how changes to AOO that are user-perceived will be reflected in > the documentation. Is not the older form to be maintained so it can be > found by someone who is looking at such a version? Also, would we want > to start marking the first version for which a page or chunk of content > is current? > > Perhaps that is covered somewhere in the documentation guidance. I > would be grateful if someone could point me to where this sort of > change-accounting and feature-progression has been decided. > > - Dennis > > PS: Although these questions struck me about the User Guide, if you look > at the top-level of the MediaWiki documentation section, there are many > items that are specific to older versions that are (or may be) obsolete > with respect to newer versions of OpenOffice. > > > > -- Dennis E. Hamilton > orc...@apache.org > dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Re: installation cd or dvd
No, you've obviously have never used linux. This has nothing to do with a stable or unstable internet connection. It has everything to do with tar gz and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$. It has everything to do with that fact that Apache Open Office is user unfriendly for linux users. WPS Kingsoft for instance is really easy to install - a simpleton like myself has no problem installing their stuff, including their patches. And I didn't have to uninstall libre first or any thing like that. Maybe look into seeing how they do it so easily. I like, but I'm not in love with their software which is why i keep coming back to Apache. But until you all figure something out, I'll keep on using WPS and Freeware, which I like less. Thank you for the quick reply though. I really didn't expect to get one.Michael Maloney On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney: This would be a huge help for those of us using linux. I used to use open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully using deb files or anything. CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet access is not available everywhere on the world. Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1]. A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html HTH Marcus
Re: installation cd or dvd
Could someone suggest Linux creators to add a setting during OS installation to choose either to install OpenOffice or LibreOffice? Thanks! Kind regards, Marco A.G.Pinto -- On 18/06/2015 16:27, Marcus wrote: Am 06/18/2015 05:03 PM, schrieb michael maloney: No, you've obviously have never used linux. This has nothing to do with a stable or unstable internet connection. It has everything to do with tar gz and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$. It has everything to do with that fact that Apache Open Office is user unfriendly for linux users. as Fedora is working with the other package manager (RPM) I don't know the problems with DEB files. But that the Linux distributors prefer LO *and* don't leave a way for alternative software is indeed a problem. Then you have (possibly) to deinstall LO and delete remaining files first before getting AOO problem-free onto disk. Sorry that this is not going as smoothly as it could be. Marcus On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney: This would be a huge help for those of us using linux. I used to use open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully using deb files or anything. CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet access is not available everywhere on the world. Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1]. A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html HTH Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --
Re: installation cd or dvd
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:27:04 +0200 Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/18/2015 05:03 PM, schrieb michael maloney: No, you've obviously have never used linux. This has nothing to do with a stable or unstable internet connection. It has everything to do with tar gz and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$. It has everything to do with that fact that Apache Open Office is user unfriendly for linux users. as Fedora is working with the other package manager (RPM) I don't know the problems with DEB files. But that the Linux distributors prefer LO *and* don't leave a way for alternative software is indeed a problem. Then you have (possibly) to deinstall LO and delete remaining files first before getting AOO problem-free onto disk. Sorry that this is not going as smoothly as it could be. Marcus If one wishes to install OpenOffice on a Linux system it is helpful to completely remove LibreOffice. One does this quite easily on any computer using DEB files by (in a terminal): sudo apt-get purge libreoffice* Installation of the OpenOffice DEB files is quite simple - I download the Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.1_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-GB.tar.gz package, as that is my choice for language and bitness - a different language or bitness choice will use a different filename and unpack directory. Then I use Archive Manager to extract its files into ~/Downloads/en-GB, start a terminal and issue the following sequence of commands: cd ~/Download/en-GB/DEBS sudo dpkg -i *.deb cd desktop-integration sudo dpkg -i *.deb and OpenOffice is installed without problems. All done and installed in about three minutes. On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney: This would be a huge help for those of us using linux. I used to use open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully using deb files or anything. CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet access is not available everywhere on the world. Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1]. A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html HTH Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: installation cd or dvd
Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney: This would be a huge help for those of us using linux. I used to use open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully using deb files or anything. CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet access is not available everywhere on the world. Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1]. A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html HTH Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
installation cd or dvd
This would be a huge help for those of us using linux. I used to use open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully using deb files or anything. Please consider the production of dvds. I think most people would be happy to pay for it. Thank you,MIchael Maloney
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
On 28/03/2015 Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: where can one apply for a wiki account? Here! I've just created one for you. You will receive a temporary password in a few minutes. Note that the 12.04 section in the page you mentioned https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 needs lots of fixes too. For example, our tarballs no longer contain incubating in their name, so links are broken. Feel free to ask here if you want to fix that section too. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
Thanks :) 2015-04-04 21:30 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org: On 28/03/2015 Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: where can one apply for a wiki account? Here! I've just created one for you. You will receive a temporary password in a few minutes. Note that the 12.04 section in the page you mentioned https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_ Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 needs lots of fixes too. For example, our tarballs no longer contain incubating in their name, so links are broken. Feel free to ask here if you want to fix that section too. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
at http://wiki.openoffice.org you sign in, then look for create account and then msg your nick to the list in order to be validated (I think). Validation process has changed through the years. The guide was fixed anyway. On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Driss Ben Zoubeir driss.zoub...@gmail.com wrote: where can one apply for a wiki account? 2015-03-28 2:13 GMT+01:00 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/27/2015 02:38 PM, Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: Hi, I think I the 2nd install command under https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 is not up to date. should the actual command looks like the following: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice4.2-debian-menus_4.2-9800_all.deb You are correct. These instructions are old it seems. If you'd like to help keep this page up to date, you could apply for an OpenOffice wiki account, and fix it! :) This is an easy fix. https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation%2FBuilding_Guide_AOO%2FStep_by_stepdiff=235940oldid=235697 Happy to see your quick progress! to start openoffice command to use is: /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice Regards Driss 2015-03-27 21:13 GMT+01:00 Driss Ben Zoubeir driss.zoub...@gmail.com : Hi Together, After successfull Build, I tried to run the installation (I dont really know what the 2nd installation command exactly do) the first installation command run successfully : sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/*.deb After running the 2nd command: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb I got the following error: dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): Auf das Archiv kann nicht zugegriffen werden: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb its german version(I am used to use German) I will change U to English that is better in communities. But here is a translations attempt: dpkg: Error while Executing Archives unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): cannot acces to archive: file or folder not found Error while executing: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb have somebody ideas why this error occurs? regards Driss -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614 -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
where can one apply for a wiki account? 2015-03-28 2:13 GMT+01:00 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/27/2015 02:38 PM, Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: Hi, I think I the 2nd install command under https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 is not up to date. should the actual command looks like the following: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice4.2-debian-menus_4.2-9800_all.deb You are correct. These instructions are old it seems. If you'd like to help keep this page up to date, you could apply for an OpenOffice wiki account, and fix it! :) This is an easy fix. https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation%2FBuilding_Guide_AOO%2FStep_by_stepdiff=235940oldid=235697 Happy to see your quick progress! to start openoffice command to use is: /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice Regards Driss 2015-03-27 21:13 GMT+01:00 Driss Ben Zoubeir driss.zoub...@gmail.com : Hi Together, After successfull Build, I tried to run the installation (I dont really know what the 2nd installation command exactly do) the first installation command run successfully : sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/*.deb After running the 2nd command: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb I got the following error: dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): Auf das Archiv kann nicht zugegriffen werden: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb its german version(I am used to use German) I will change U to English that is better in communities. But here is a translations attempt: dpkg: Error while Executing Archives unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): cannot acces to archive: file or folder not found Error while executing: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb have somebody ideas why this error occurs? regards Driss -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
Hi Together, After successfull Build, I tried to run the installation (I dont really know what the 2nd installation command exactly do) the first installation command run successfully : sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/*.deb After running the 2nd command: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb I got the following error: dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): Auf das Archiv kann nicht zugegriffen werden: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb its german version(I am used to use German) I will change U to English that is better in communities. But here is a translations attempt: dpkg: Error while Executing Archives unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): cannot acces to archive: file or folder not found Error while executing: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb have somebody ideas why this error occurs? regards Driss
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
On 03/27/2015 02:38 PM, Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: Hi, I think I the 2nd install command under https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 is not up to date. should the actual command looks like the following: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice4.2-debian-menus_4.2-9800_all.deb You are correct. These instructions are old it seems. If you'd like to help keep this page up to date, you could apply for an OpenOffice wiki account, and fix it! :) Happy to see your quick progress! to start openoffice command to use is: /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice Regards Driss 2015-03-27 21:13 GMT+01:00 Driss Ben Zoubeir driss.zoub...@gmail.com: Hi Together, After successfull Build, I tried to run the installation (I dont really know what the 2nd installation command exactly do) the first installation command run successfully : sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/*.deb After running the 2nd command: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb I got the following error: dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): Auf das Archiv kann nicht zugegriffen werden: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb its german version(I am used to use German) I will change U to English that is better in communities. But here is a translations attempt: dpkg: Error while Executing Archives unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): cannot acces to archive: file or folder not found Error while executing: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb have somebody ideas why this error occurs? regards Driss -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Error at installation after building Openoffice (Ubuntu 14.04)
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/27/2015 02:38 PM, Driss Ben Zoubeir wrote: Hi, I think I the 2nd install command under https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Ubuntu_14.04 is not up to date. should the actual command looks like the following: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice4.2-debian-menus_4.2-9800_all.deb You are correct. These instructions are old it seems. If you'd like to help keep this page up to date, you could apply for an OpenOffice wiki account, and fix it! :) This is an easy fix. https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation%2FBuilding_Guide_AOO%2FStep_by_stepdiff=235940oldid=235697 Happy to see your quick progress! to start openoffice command to use is: /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice Regards Driss 2015-03-27 21:13 GMT+01:00 Driss Ben Zoubeir driss.zoub...@gmail.com: Hi Together, After successfull Build, I tried to run the installation (I dont really know what the 2nd installation command exactly do) the first installation command run successfully : sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/*.deb After running the 2nd command: sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb I got the following error: dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): Auf das Archiv kann nicht zugegriffen werden: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb its german version(I am used to use German) I will change U to English that is better in communities. But here is a translations attempt: dpkg: Error while Executing Archives unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb (--install): cannot acces to archive: file or folder not found Error while executing: unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/DEBS/desktop-integration/openoffice.org3.4-debian-menus_3.4-9593_all.deb have somebody ideas why this error occurs? regards Driss -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Re: installation issues
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:42:27 -0600 Paul Johns pa...@ktc.com wrote: I have tried to download and install Open Office 4.1.1. I can not get it to complete installation because I keep getting this message. Please exit OpenOffice 4.1.1 and the OpenOffice 4.1.1 Quickstater before you continue. If you are using a Multi-user system, also make sure that no other user has OpenOffice 4.1.1 open I don't understand. This is a desktop PC and not a multiuser system. There is no one else logged on or any network connections. How do I get this to install ? Please help. Thank You Paul Johns 116 Paradise Ave. Kerrville, Texas 78028 830-895-4281 If you are using Windows, start TaskManager (Ctrl Shift Esc) and kill all soffice processes shown on TM's Processes tab. This will close all instances of OpenOffice, including the Quickstarter (the cause of the problem). Then install OpenOffice again. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
installation issues
I have tried to download and install Open Office 4.1.1. I can not get it to complete installation because I keep getting this message. Please exit OpenOffice 4.1.1 and the OpenOffice 4.1.1 Quickstater before you continue. If you are using a Multi-user system, also make sure that no other user has OpenOffice 4.1.1 open I don't understand. This is a desktop PC and not a multiuser system. There is no one else logged on or any network connections. How do I get this to install ? Please help. Thank You Paul Johns 116 Paradise Ave. Kerrville, Texas 78028 830-895-4281
The installation of open office on Debian wheezy
I cannot seem to install on my debian wheezy I am missing binaries. Do you have any ideas.I have a 32 bit Linux debian wheezy os Thank you for you attention in this matter. Sherry Winter.
Re: The installation of open office on Debian wheezy
Hello you can install the debs from www.openoffice.org Please untar the tar.gz into a separate directory In this directory dpkg -i *.deb Then you find the binaries in /opt Kind regards Mechtilde Am 30.11.2014 um 10:57 schrieb Sherry Winter: I cannot seem to install on my debian wheezy I am missing binaries. Do you have any ideas.I have a 32 bit Linux debian wheezy os Thank you for you attention in this matter. Sherry Winter. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: The installation of open office on Debian wheezy
Hi Sherry, here you can download binaries, choose Linux 32bit DEB, your language and version 4.1.1 http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html when the download will be at end here is brief instructions how to install it http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#linux-deb Have a good day. Dňa 30.11.2014 o 10:57 Sherry Winter napísal(a): I cannot seem to install on my debian wheezy I am missing binaries. Do you have any ideas.I have a 32 bit Linux debian wheezy os Thank you for you attention in this matter. Sherry Winter. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Getting rid of installation/testarea
We have files (RPM and DEB packages and several other files, totalling ~180 MBytes) in http://www.openoffice.org/installation/testarea/ that is absolutely outdated. I will soon remove it unless someone sees good reasons for keeping it. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.1_release_blocker granted: [Issue 125262] Dictionaries updates right after installation
j...@apache.org has granted 4.1.1_release_blocker: Issue 125262: Dictionaries updates right after installation https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125262 --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org grant showstopper flag - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Reporting broken download link installation of apache_openoffice_410... failed
installation of apache_openoffice_410... failed Norton removed the file with this error WS.Reputation.1 Details: Updated: February 15, 2012 3:15:47 PM Type: Other Risk Impact: High Systems Affected: Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows NT, Windows Server 2003, Windows 2000 Behavior WS.Reputation.1 is a detection for files that have a low reputation score based on analyzing data from Symantec’s community of users and therefore are likely to be security risks. Detections of this type are based on Symantec’s reputation-based security technology. Because this detection is based on a reputation score, it does not represent a specific class of threat like adware or spyware, but instead applies to all threat categories. The reputation-based system uses the wisdom of crowds (Symantec’s tens of millions of end users) connected to cloud-based intelligence to compute a reputation score for an application, and in the process identify malicious software in an entirely new way beyond traditional signatures and behavior-based detection techniques. Antivirus Protection Dates Initial Rapid Release version March 27, 2009 Latest Rapid Release version April 20, 2010 revision 025 Initial Daily Certified version March 27, 2009 revision 005 Latest Daily Certified version April 20, 2010 revision 024 Initial Weekly Certified release date April 1, 2009 Click here for a more detailed description of Rapid Release and Daily Certified virus definitions - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Reporting broken download link installation of apache_openoffice_410... failed
Hi Ted, thanks for your report. From our past experience this problem is caused by downloading OpenOffice from a different location than the one and only official one. Other 3rd party vendors who offer a download from websites can manipulate the binary file(s) with malware, viruses, ad-ware, etc. Therefore please make sure to download OpenOffice only from official location: http://www.openoffice.org/download/ Of course this applies to all software, not only OpenOffice. HTH Marcus Am 06/12/2014 05:58 PM, schrieb Ted Bacot: installation of apache_openoffice_410... failed Norton removed the file with this error WS.Reputation.1 [...] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.0_release_blocker requested: [Issue 124682] Installation of Language Pack fails with error message Product has already been installed
Rainer Bielefeld rainerbielefeld_ooo...@bielefeldundbuss.de has asked for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Issue 124682: Installation of Language Pack fails with error message Product has already been installed https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124682 --- Additional Comments from Rainer Bielefeld rainerbielefeld_ooo...@bielefeldundbuss.de Also on a problem on a second WIN7 PC This is not a problem with update existing Language Packs, I never have had installed Dutch or Khmer UI. But because we have a patch I think that's already known. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.0_release_blocker granted: [Issue 124682] Installation of Language Pack fails with error message Product has already been installed
j...@apache.org has granted Rainer Bielefeld rainerbielefeld_ooo...@bielefeldundbuss.de's request for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Issue 124682: Installation of Language Pack fails with error message Product has already been installed https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124682 --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org grant showstopper flag - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
Dear Pedro Per Juergen, we won't release msp's because of some issues that we have to solve first. So I think, we will not mention MSP in Installation guide although the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP. How do you think? On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds perfect. Adding options (instead of assuming and deciding for the user) is always positive ;) Please make sure that the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- Regards, Yu Zhen
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
Hi All, Thank you all for valuable comments, I am contacting the native speaker for tweaking the wording. (Added d...@openoffice.apache.org in this mail thread) On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Pedro Per Juergen, we won't release msp's because of some issues that we have to solve first. So I think, we will not mention MSP in Installation guide although the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP. How do you think? On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds perfect. Adding options (instead of assuming and deciding for the user) is always positive ;) Please make sure that the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- Regards, Yu Zhen
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
On 10.04.2014 06:55, Yuzhen Fan wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: Good idea. Good text but maybe a native speaker can tweek the wording. -Andre 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
On 4/8/14, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. Should this be on d...@openoffice.apache.org? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor http://www.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
Sounds perfect. Adding options (instead of assuming and deciding for the user) is always positive ;) Please make sure that the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Regards, Yu Zhen
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 10.04.2014 06:55, Yuzhen Fan wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: Good idea. Good text but maybe a native speaker can tweek the wording. -Andre 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? This sounds good. We can tweak the wording as needed. It would also be very helpful to provide a screen shot of the installation wizard for case #1 I think. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions. html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in AOO 4.1.0 RC2, from current behaviors and comments provided in this bug, the expected behaviors for upgrade on Windows could be: 1. If the former version is 3.x, there will be a check box in Installation Wizard providing the option to keep or remove the former version - If select Remove all older product versions, then 3.x will be removed and 4.x will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for 4.x - If de-select Remove all older product versions, then 4.x will be installed with keeping 3.x, there will be 2 startup groups, 2 desktop icons and 2 entries in the Add/Remove Programs list. These artifacts are one suite for 3.x and the other suite for 4.x 2. If the former version is also 4.x, but older than current installing one(e.g. install 4.1.0 over 4.0.0), then the older one will be removed and the newer one will be installed with 1 startup group, 1 desktop icon and 1 entry in the Add/Remove Programs list. This artifact is for the newer one. I think above behaviors are acceptable, I propose to update the installation instructions [1] according those. Any comments, or any objections? [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Regards, Yu Zhen
Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen
Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The current installation instructions [1] (last updated on 2014-03-26) does not differentiate the clean installation and upgrade installation for Windows, thus it does not state the option to keep or delete the old version for an upgrade installation. I propose development update the installation instructions [1] when submit the fix to bug 124599 [2], to provide what is expected to see with details as below: 1. Upgrade from old version to relative new version (e.g. from 3.3 to 3.4.1, from 3.4.1 to 4.1.0, from 4.0.0 to 4.1.0, etc) 2. Specify the different behavior/experience on all platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) - I do not see problems in the current instructions on Linux and Mac, but need confirmation That is essential, because for testers we need this as criteria for testing, and for end users we need this as instructions for guiding. You are right. We need to have our installations instructions accurate! Commmitters can directly edit this page and commit. Others can submit patches which we can review. We could use help from all folks using our installation binaries on this. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html#winoverview [2] Issue 124599 - Windows 4.1.0 installer does not recognize former versions correctly -- Regards, Yu Zhen -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124400 and issue 124408
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: OK, back to topic. Therefore top posting. I was a bit curious. So, I did a little test. The instructions.html file does not contain any references about CSS. So, I included the styles.css and exceptions.css files and looked at the local file -- It changed the layout. oops! I am probably responsible for that... Now I committed the file to the test area into staging and compared old [1] and new [2]. Now the headings can be identified as headings again. If this is looking nice is a different topic. ;-) [1] http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/common/instructions.html [2] http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/instructions.html Marcus This IS better. I think if we fixed the styling for h2 tag to add some spacing at the top, we'd be in business! Thanks for tracking this down. Am 03/14/2014 09:46 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): Am 03/14/2014 08:20 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 13.03.2014 21:52, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. No, I do not expect any code. Just feedback as you have given, but also alternative suggestions, when my proposed changes are not your favorites. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) No, but I mad a mistake - see below. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Damn, now I know what went wrong. I referenced the wrong issues - I am sorry. It is 124400 for the formatting on the installation guide website and 124408 [1] for the content on the installation guide website. That is why I was puzzled by your suggestion to 'start improving content and then look on formatting'. ah, got it. :-) Thus, content and formatting of our installation guide is what I want to work on [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124408 - Improve AOO Installation Guide With the content I think I cannot help. I've just Linux and my installation is just: cd path_to_RPMS sudo rpm -ivh * I don't care about icons, system integration as I don't use it anyway. But I can work on the styling if it's OK. My suggestion remains: 1. Improve the content. 2. Then we know the document structure. 3. Then we can improve the styling. If there a good reasons, we can start to improve the styling earlier of course. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124400 and issue 124408
Hi, On 13.03.2014 21:52, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. No, I do not expect any code. Just feedback as you have given, but also alternative suggestions, when my proposed changes are not your favorites. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) No, but I mad a mistake - see below. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Damn, now I know what went wrong. I referenced the wrong issues - I am sorry. It is 124400 for the formatting on the installation guide website and 124408 [1] for the content on the installation guide website. That is why I was puzzled by your suggestion to 'start improving content and then look on formatting'. Thus, content and formatting of our installation guide is what I want to work on [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124408 - Improve AOO Installation Guide Best regards, Oliver. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124400 and issue 124408
On 03/14/2014 12:20 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, On 13.03.2014 21:52, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. No, I do not expect any code. Just feedback as you have given, but also alternative suggestions, when my proposed changes are not your favorites. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) No, but I mad a mistake - see below. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Damn, now I know what went wrong. I referenced the wrong issues - I am sorry. It is 124400 for the formatting on the installation guide website and 124408 [1] for the content on the installation guide website. That is why I was puzzled by your suggestion to 'start improving content and then look on formatting'. Thus, content and formatting of our installation guide is what I want to work on [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124408 - Improve AOO Installation Guide Best regards, Oliver. Got it! :} I'm sure we can do both -- with some help from the community! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124400 and issue 124408
Am 03/14/2014 08:20 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 13.03.2014 21:52, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. No, I do not expect any code. Just feedback as you have given, but also alternative suggestions, when my proposed changes are not your favorites. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) No, but I mad a mistake - see below. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Damn, now I know what went wrong. I referenced the wrong issues - I am sorry. It is 124400 for the formatting on the installation guide website and 124408 [1] for the content on the installation guide website. That is why I was puzzled by your suggestion to 'start improving content and then look on formatting'. ah, got it. :-) Thus, content and formatting of our installation guide is what I want to work on [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124408 - Improve AOO Installation Guide With the content I think I cannot help. I've just Linux and my installation is just: cd path_to_RPMS sudo rpm -ivh * I don't care about icons, system integration as I don't use it anyway. But I can work on the styling if it's OK. My suggestion remains: 1. Improve the content. 2. Then we know the document structure. 3. Then we can improve the styling. If there a good reasons, we can start to improve the styling earlier of course. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124400 and issue 124408
OK, back to topic. Therefore top posting. I was a bit curious. So, I did a little test. The instructions.html file does not contain any references about CSS. So, I included the styles.css and exceptions.css files and looked at the local file -- It changed the layout. Now I committed the file to the test area into staging and compared old [1] and new [2]. Now the headings can be identified as headings again. If this is looking nice is a different topic. ;-) [1] http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/common/instructions.html [2] http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/instructions.html Marcus Am 03/14/2014 09:46 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): Am 03/14/2014 08:20 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 13.03.2014 21:52, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. No, I do not expect any code. Just feedback as you have given, but also alternative suggestions, when my proposed changes are not your favorites. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) No, but I mad a mistake - see below. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Damn, now I know what went wrong. I referenced the wrong issues - I am sorry. It is 124400 for the formatting on the installation guide website and 124408 [1] for the content on the installation guide website. That is why I was puzzled by your suggestion to 'start improving content and then look on formatting'. ah, got it. :-) Thus, content and formatting of our installation guide is what I want to work on [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124408 - Improve AOO Installation Guide With the content I think I cannot help. I've just Linux and my installation is just: cd path_to_RPMS sudo rpm -ivh * I don't care about icons, system integration as I don't use it anyway. But I can work on the styling if it's OK. My suggestion remains: 1. Improve the content. 2. Then we know the document structure. 3. Then we can improve the styling. If there a good reasons, we can start to improve the styling earlier of course. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. Best regards, Oliver. Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. OK Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Hi,
On 12.03.2014 17:35, Kay Schenk wrote:
On 03/12/2014 04:30 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
Hi,
Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement -
see issues 124343 and 124400.
I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and
feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer
Issue 124343:
This is about the visibility of the headings.
My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all
levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding
CSS [1].
Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion.
Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website
bold?
Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading?
Should we make all heading italic or larger?
Issue 124400:
I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback
once the changes are on the staging server.
Thanks in advance for your review and feedback.
[1]
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css
Best regards, Oliver.
Rainer has a point. I remember at one time that h3 (probably the main
concern here) used to display as described in styles.css
h3.subSection{font-style:italic;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:1.3em;font-weight:bold;}
I'm not sure what's changed to produce what's happening now.
css/ooo.css is the default supplied by Apache CMS but our local style
sheets, also brought in, should override this. (And, yes, they are a bit
of a mess!)
Well I can help with this but I'm not what the processing order is now.
Thanks for the offer to help here.
I used Firefox's build-in Inspector and Style Editor (Menu Tools - Web
Developer - Inspector|Style Editor) to investigate the used styling.
Best regards, Oliver.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Am 03/13/2014 01:08 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Well this one particular stylesheet is a holdover from the old days, so it's rather needlessly complex. We have the ooo.css and on some pages also the styles.css. And then somethimes the exceptions.css to make exceptions to the general styling. Yes, pretty complex. ;-) I'm not guru enough to explain roughly the details how it works. I need to dig in deeper. ...and it looks like I erred in my reference since theh3 in the installation instructions stands alone and not in a subsection. At any rate, at one time it was italicized -- now it's not, and I don't see any changes to this stylesheet file in a long time, so it's a puzzle to me. I am also working on some html changes currently (cleanup of a pdf to html for publication) , so I will have a look as well over the next few days. For me it's OK if you want to take over to improve the styling. Marcus Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. What do you think? Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. OK Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/ css/ooo.css Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Am 03/13/2014 09:36 AM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 12.03.2014 21:15, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) Such a feedback does not help as you only say no, no, no, ... without any alternative suggestion :-) I'm sorry when you expected some code or else. But without looking closer into the CSS styling I wouldn't do anything. I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. BTW: This was my suggestion. Maybe you have overlooked it. ;-) What do you think? Hm. We have issue 124343 for the formatting and issue 124400 for the content. Changing the words of a heading will not improve its visibility. Thus, I think that these issues can be treated separately. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124400 Website: Installation guides: Headings do not look like headings https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124343 Website: Bugzilla documentation: Headings do not look like headings For me it's the same - just 2 different websites. I've adjusted the issue summaries. Marcus Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. OK Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
On 03/13/2014 01:51 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 03/13/2014 01:08 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Well this one particular stylesheet is a holdover from the old days, so it's rather needlessly complex. We have the ooo.css and on some pages also the styles.css. And then somethimes the exceptions.css to make exceptions to the general styling. Yes, pretty complex. ;-) and don't forget home.css for styling on the home page only! :) I'm not guru enough to explain roughly the details how it works. I need to dig in deeper. ...and it looks like I erred in my reference since theh3 in the installation instructions stands alone and not in a subsection. At any rate, at one time it was italicized -- now it's not, and I don't see any changes to this stylesheet file in a long time, so it's a puzzle to me. I am also working on some html changes currently (cleanup of a pdf to html for publication) , so I will have a look as well over the next few days. For me it's OK if you want to take over to improve the styling. Marcus I will help. But I may not be able to get to much until early next week. We should probably not edit /css/ooo.css. I will likely make changes to our main stylsheet -- styles.css. We do need help with heading differentiation and this should be pretty simple. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. What do you think? Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. OK Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/ css/ooo.css Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css Best regards, Oliver. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
On 03/12/2014 04:30 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
Hi,
Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement -
see issues 124343 and 124400.
I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and
feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer
Issue 124343:
This is about the visibility of the headings.
My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all
levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding
CSS [1].
Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion.
Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold?
Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading?
Should we make all heading italic or larger?
Issue 124400:
I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback
once the changes are on the staging server.
Thanks in advance for your review and feedback.
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css
Best regards, Oliver.
Rainer has a point. I remember at one time that h3 (probably the main
concern here) used to display as described in styles.css
h3.subSection{font-style:italic;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:1.3em;font-weight:bold;}
I'm not sure what's changed to produce what's happening now.
css/ooo.css is the default supplied by Apache CMS but our local style
sheets, also brought in, should override this. (And, yes, they are a bit
of a mess!)
Well I can help with this but I'm not what the processing order is now.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
--
-
MzK
Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect.
-- James Mason
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DOCUMENTATION] better installation guide - issue 124343 and issue 124400
Am 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, Rainer recently noticed that our installation guides needs improvement - see issues 124343 and 124400. I am volunteering to take corresponding actions. But I need support and feedback - I am neither a web designer nor a technical writer I can support you with the webdesign. Maybe it's gets a bit hard (when I read Kay's mail ;-) ) but I would try. Issue 124343: This is about the visibility of the headings. My suggestion here is to make the font used for the headings (all levels) bold. Thus, I would like to propose to change our corresponding CSS [1]. Please provide feedback regarding my suggestion. This is a central CSS file. Changes here would affect nearly all webpages. This needs to be treated very carefully. Does it makes sense to make more or less all headings on our website bold? No, I'm pretty sure here and there it wouldn't be the intended style. Are there alternatives to improve the visibility of heading? Should we make all heading italic or larger? Again no. ;-) I would start with improving the text content. Then we should think about the formatting. What do you think? Issue 124400: I will prepare the corresponding changes and I will ask for feedback once the changes are on the staging server. OK Thanks in advance for your review and feedback. [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/site/trunk/content/css/ooo.css Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
installation ooo4
cela ne marche pas au moment installation il manque 1 fichier essayer 3 fois
Re: installation ooo4
Bonjour sur quel système êtes-vous? Quelle version avez-vous téléchargé ? Bien à vous Sylvain DENIS Le 28/07/13 21:12, gauci gilles a écrit : cela ne marche pas au moment installation il manque 1 fichier essayer 3 fois - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: question problems bij installation
hello, an acquaintance of mine has a problem with the installation of Apache OpenOffice. thanks Sylvain DENIS Here is his email : Le 25/07/13 19:29, Ton Mulder a écrit : /Dear Sir,/ // /By downloading Openoffice 4.0 comes de faultmention:/ // /Instruction 0x5bc46935/ /cannot be written with de faultnumber: 0x013fde020./ /It is Windows XP/ // /Can you solve that problem?/ // /Thanks/ // /greetings/ /Ton Mulder The Netherlands/
Re: question problems bij installation
Am 07/27/2013 02:21 PM, schrieb Sylvain DENIS: hello, an acquaintance of mine has a problem with the installation of Apache OpenOffice. thanks Sylvain DENIS Here is his email : Le 25/07/13 19:29, Ton Mulder a écrit : /Dear Sir,/ // /By downloading Openoffice 4.0 comes de faultmention:/ // /Instruction 0x5bc46935/ /cannot be written with de faultnumber: 0x013fde020./ /It is Windows XP/ // /Can you solve that problem?/ I've never seen such an error message but have some questions: Can you please post the exact wording, as it doesn't look original and a bit translated. ;-) Is this error while the download is still running? Or when the installation was already started? Does the user download(ed) from our website? Thanks, maybe the answers will help others to investigate. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: question problems bij installation
Thanks. I transfer to Ton Mulder @Ton Mulder : you can respond directly to the dev list as you have a direct response Thanks Sylvain DENIS Le 27/07/13 16:39, Marcus (OOo) a écrit : Am 07/27/2013 02:21 PM, schrieb Sylvain DENIS: hello, an acquaintance of mine has a problem with the installation of Apache OpenOffice. thanks Sylvain DENIS Here is his email : Le 25/07/13 19:29, Ton Mulder a écrit : /Dear Sir,/ // /By downloading Openoffice 4.0 comes de faultmention:/ // /Instruction 0x5bc46935/ /cannot be written with de faultnumber: 0x013fde020./ /It is Windows XP/ // /Can you solve that problem?/ I've never seen such an error message but have some questions: Can you please post the exact wording, as it doesn't look original and a bit translated. ;-) Is this error while the download is still running? Or when the installation was already started? Does the user download(ed) from our website? Thanks, maybe the answers will help others to investigate. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
On 7/15/2013 10:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: [...] And my translation: I have deleted two OO-Config Folder in AppData\Roaming which I missed in my first attempt. - AppData\Roaming\3 of the previously deinstalled AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 of the parallel installed AOO400-Snapshots. - And the installation folders in \Program File(x86) I had deinstalled/deleted AOO341 and AOO400-Snapshot already before RC-Installation. I assume, that an Average Joe user has not installed a snapshot previously and therefore no config folder \4 exists. Up to now I have always installed the full versions over my old versions, and never got problems (or never notice some.) I'll do some testing tonight. I have two clean VM images, for Windows 8 32-bit and Windows 7 64-bit, that I can install the AOO 4.0 RC on. Since these are fresh images they don't have any residual files from previous AOO installs. I was not able to get a crash with AOO 4.0 RC on Windows 7 64-bit or Windows 8 32-bit. I tested Writer in a document with a mix of objects and formats, doing a lot of editing, formatting, copy/paste and delete operations, including formatting via the Sidepanel. This was the en-US version. So this doesn't look like a shallow crash that everyone will see. But it would be good to narrow it down.For example, has anyone seen it on a non-German version? Is that a clue? Is a particular object involved? I tried also with images, drawings, lists, tables, etc. Was anything more exotic involved? While I was a QA engineer for OpenOffice at Sun, we had: ++ Crashes that were limited to a particular language ++ Crashes that happened only (exactly) once with every installation. ++ Crashes that happened only after the first start of an installation ++ Of course, crashes that were limited to a particular language ++ ... Now imagine even a combination of two or more of those preconditions and you may prefer looking for a needle in a haystack. Virtualbox for example has the great feature of taking snapshots. That should be extremely useful to be able to rollback preconditions. Peter Mine was a clean new install, not an update. But it is hard to imagine a scenario where copy or delete operations behave differently depending on whether the install was an update or not. -Rob -Rob Kind regards Regina Kind regards Regina - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
On 14.07.2013 22:34, Max Merbald wrote: Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. This may very well have been caused by a regression bug I have introduced (and later fixed). It was usually triggered by copying or removing selected text in Writer. The issues are 121479 (the fix for this bug introduced the regression) and 122682 (fix for it, checked in on July 8th): https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121479 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122682 And just to be clear, this has been fixed and is not in the release. -Andre Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
On 15.07.2013 10:09, Andre Fischer wrote: On 14.07.2013 22:34, Max Merbald wrote: Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. This may very well have been caused by a regression bug I have introduced (and later fixed). It was usually triggered by copying or removing selected text in Writer. The issues are 121479 (the fix for this bug introduced the regression) and 122682 (fix for it, checked in on July 8th): https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121479 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122682 And just to be clear, this has been fixed and is not in the release. OK, that was not very clear :-) The bug *fix* is in the release and therefore the bug is not. -Andre Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
I have opened a new bug, with the version from about in the comments, please let me know if this is still the same bug. I did a upgrade from 3.4.1 to 4.0.0. Hiding the side panel did not affect outcome. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122752 On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 15.07.2013 10:09, Andre Fischer wrote: On 14.07.2013 22:34, Max Merbald wrote: Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. This may very well have been caused by a regression bug I have introduced (and later fixed). It was usually triggered by copying or removing selected text in Writer. The issues are 121479 (the fix for this bug introduced the regression) and 122682 (fix for it, checked in on July 8th): https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=121479https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121479 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=122682https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122682 And just to be clear, this has been fixed and is not in the release. OK, that was not very clear :-) The bug *fix* is in the release and therefore the bug is not. -Andre Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.orge-mail%3adev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-help@openoffice.**apache.orge-mail%3adev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.orge-mail%3adev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-help@openoffice.**apache.orge-mail%3adev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.orge-mail%3adev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-help@openoffice.**apache.orge-mail%3adev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--** - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
