glibc version mentioned on README file
>From this forum thread http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=60439 I can see that the README file included on the Linux install say that glibc version needed is "2.5 or higher", but AFAIK AOO is being build with 2.11 which cause the problems commented on Issue 119385. Maybe the readme file need a change? Something like (correct me if I'm wrong) "at least 2.5 is needed to build the software from source, but the official builds need at least 2.11". Regards Ricardo
Re: glibc version mentioned on README file
Hi On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:53:57PM +0100, RGB ES wrote: > From this forum thread > > http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=60439 > > I can see that the README file included on the Linux install say that glibc > version needed is "2.5 or higher", but AFAIK AOO is being build with 2.11 > which cause the problems commented on Issue 119385. Maybe the readme file > need a change? Something like (correct me if I'm wrong) "at least 2.5 is > needed to build the software from source, but the official builds need at > least 2.11". This is bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119393 The information was updated on the site only http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo34.html Linux kernel version 2.6 or higher, glibc2 version 2.11.1 or higher Updating the README at that time would have triggered a new translation update, see comment 10 in that bug. Current developer snapshots (and future 4.0) will be built on a system with glibc-2.5 /CentOS 5), see https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385 And IMO we should simplify the README: system requirements are on the website, on the download page; maintaining more that one place is error prone (bug 119393 is the proof); the user is supposed to read the system requirements of what he is going to download *before* s/he downloads it and installs it, not once installed, in the README. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpJj9uAjkdqg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: glibc version mentioned on README file
On 16 March 2013 00:08, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:53:57PM +0100, RGB ES wrote: > > From this forum thread > > > > http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=60439 > > > > I can see that the README file included on the Linux install say that > glibc > > version needed is "2.5 or higher", but AFAIK AOO is being build with 2.11 > > which cause the problems commented on Issue 119385. Maybe the readme file > > need a change? Something like (correct me if I'm wrong) "at least 2.5 is > > needed to build the software from source, but the official builds need at > > least 2.11". > > This is bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119393 > The information was updated on the site only > http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo34.html > Linux kernel version 2.6 or higher, glibc2 version 2.11.1 or higher > > Updating the README at that time would have triggered a new translation > update, see comment 10 in that bug. > > Current developer snapshots (and future 4.0) will be built on a system > with glibc-2.5 /CentOS 5), see > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385 > > And IMO we should simplify the README: system requirements are on the > website, on the download page; maintaining more that one place is error > prone (bug 119393 is the proof); the user is supposed to read the system > requirements of what he is going to download *before* s/he downloads it > and installs it, not once installed, in the README. > +1, I would prefer our readme file simply contained links to the relevant pages on www or mwiki. I think we should have a couple of pages: - system requirements - release notes - known issues (this should be a live page, where we can keep a list a bugs specific to this version) I agree totally that keeping the info in more than one place is not correct. rgds jan I. > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina >
Re: glibc version mentioned on README file
2013/3/16 Ariel Constenla-Haile > Hi > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:53:57PM +0100, RGB ES wrote: > > From this forum thread > > > > http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=60439 > > > > I can see that the README file included on the Linux install say that > glibc > > version needed is "2.5 or higher", but AFAIK AOO is being build with 2.11 > > which cause the problems commented on Issue 119385. Maybe the readme file > > need a change? Something like (correct me if I'm wrong) "at least 2.5 is > > needed to build the software from source, but the official builds need at > > least 2.11". > > This is bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119393 > The information was updated on the site only > http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo34.html > Linux kernel version 2.6 or higher, glibc2 version 2.11.1 or higher > > Updating the README at that time would have triggered a new translation > update, see comment 10 in that bug. > > Current developer snapshots (and future 4.0) will be built on a system > with glibc-2.5 /CentOS 5), see > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385 > > And IMO we should simplify the README: system requirements are on the > website, on the download page; maintaining more that one place is error > prone (bug 119393 is the proof); the user is supposed to read the system > requirements of what he is going to download *before* s/he downloads it > and installs it, not once installed, in the README. > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina > Perfectly clear. Thanks! Regards Ricardo
