Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
I use OpenOffice 2.3.1 on several hardwareplatforms running FreeBSD 7.0-PRE/AMD64 and since I upgraded OpenOffice from OO 2.3.0 to 2.3.1 I have massive problems, rendering OO unusuable! Before doing a PR I would like to aks whethere there is a solution out. Whenever I try to save a document in OO writer, OO gets stuck and I have to kill it. The document gets saved, but I never can load it again without rendering OO unusuable. Opening M$ Word docs or OO docs doesn't matter. This breakage is identical on all of my systems I run OO 2.3.1 on, they all have in common running FreeBSD 7.0-PRE, being 64 Bit, having diablo-1.5-JDK installed. This behaviour even occurs on a freshly installed box. Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( Regards, Oliver ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
O. Hartmann wrote: [...] Whenever I try to save a document in OO writer, OO gets stuck and I have to kill it. The document gets saved, but I never can load it again without rendering OO unusuable. Opening M$ Word docs or OO docs doesn't matter. I have similar problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD/i386 (I'm running 7.0-PRE as of Dec 23). It's possible to save documents but exiting OOo hangs and I need to kill it. Firing up OOo once again, there's this recovery stuff which hangs also and eats up CPU time. Only way out: kill -9 $PID Opening a document via 'File - Open - ...' hangs also. .odt or .doc doesn't matter. Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or going back to OOo 2.3.0... Regards, Philipp ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
Philipp Ost writes: Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or going back to OOo 2.3.0... This has been discussed within the last two weeks on the openoffice@ list. A message from Peter Jeremy on December 14 contains both information about the cause and a patch. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD Port: p5-GSSAPI-0.24
Hi, I think this port is missing a dependecy on heimdal. It kept failing to install on my FreeBSD 4.9 box with the following error... Searching krb5-config command... not found! at ./Makefile.PL line 94. ... so I manually installed heimdal from /usr/ports/security/heimdal/ and then this port installed correctly. -Richard ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 10:41:57AM -0500, Robert Huff wrote: This has been discussed within the last two weeks on the openoffice@ list. A message from Peter Jeremy on December 14 contains both information about the cause and a patch. My patch was for a different problem - related to OOo not opening any files. I'm not currently in a position to verify but I don't believe that the patch I made is related to O.Hartmann's problem. -- Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour. pgpjg7RHXZmvl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
Robert Huff wrote: Philipp Ost writes: Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or going back to OOo 2.3.0... This has been discussed within the last two weeks on the openoffice@ list. A message from Peter Jeremy on December 14 contains both information about the cause and a patch. Robert Huff ___ I am not an OpenOffice user but my 2c about the topic as the problem I think underline more serous issue. The question is why is OpenOffice 2.3.1 included in the ports three so quickly without making sure that things work properly. BSD systems are genuinely known for their stability and code correctness which is why most people decided to use them on the first place. Rushing to include new software in the ports three without proper testing is seriously going to damage usability of the whole OS. In my understanding ports tree is supporting stable and the current brunch. I am of the opinion that the ports three of the stable branch should not include nothing but the rock solid and tested software. The easiest way for me to check if the port is bleeding edge that is to try to install the same software using binaries. (pkg_add -r) If the binaries do not exist or if the version installed from binaries is older that clearly indicates that the port version is too new to be trusted. I personally found out that Xfce4-panel is not compiling properly on stable and also Orage (calendar for Xfce) While problems with Xfce4-panel are not as serious as with Orage (which is not usable in any shape or form on FreeBSD) they are still serious. The same packages work flawlessly on the OpenBSD. Happy New Year to Everybody Predrag freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
Philipp Ost wrote: O. Hartmann wrote: [...] Whenever I try to save a document in OO writer, OO gets stuck and I have to kill it. The document gets saved, but I never can load it again without rendering OO unusuable. Opening M$ Word docs or OO docs doesn't matter. I have similar problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD/i386 (I'm running 7.0-PRE as of Dec 23). It's possible to save documents but exiting OOo hangs and I need to kill it. Firing up OOo once again, there's this recovery stuff which hangs also and eats up CPU time. Only way out: kill -9 $PID Opening a document via 'File - Open - ...' hangs also. .odt or .doc doesn't matter. Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or going back to OOo 2.3.0... Regards, Philipp ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not an OpenOffice user but my 2c about the topic as the problem I think underline more serous issue. The question is why is OpenOffice 2.3.1 included in the ports three so quickly without making sure that things work properly. BSD systems are genuinely known for their stability and code correctness which is why most people decided to use them on the first place. Rushing to include new software in the ports three without proper testing is seriously going to damage usability of the whole OS. In my understanding ports tree is supporting stable and the current brunch. I am of the opinion that the ports three of the stable branch should not include nothing but the rock solid and tested software. The easiest way for me to check if the port is bleeding edge that is to try to install the same software using binaries. (pkg_add -r) If the binaries do not exist or if the version installed from binaries is older that clearly indicates that the port version is too new to be trusted. I personally found out that Xfce4-panel is not compiling properly on stable and also Orage (calendar for Xfce) While problems with Xfce4-panel are not as serious as with Orage (which is not usable in any shape or form on FreeBSD) they are still serious. The same packages work flawlessly on the OpenBSD. Happy New Year to Everybody Predrag ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
Predrag Punosevac wrote: Philipp Ost wrote: O. Hartmann wrote: [...] Whenever I try to save a document in OO writer, OO gets stuck and I have to kill it. The document gets saved, but I never can load it again without rendering OO unusuable. Opening M$ Word docs or OO docs doesn't matter. I have similar problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD/i386 (I'm running 7.0-PRE as of Dec 23). It's possible to save documents but exiting OOo hangs and I need to kill it. Firing up OOo once again, there's this recovery stuff which hangs also and eats up CPU time. Only way out: kill -9 $PID Opening a document via 'File - Open - ...' hangs also. .odt or .doc doesn't matter. Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a properly working OO :-( No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or going back to OOo 2.3.0... Regards, Philipp ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am not an OpenOffice user but my 2c about the topic as the problem I think underline more serous issue. The question is why is OpenOffice 2.3.1 included in the ports three so quickly without making sure that things work properly. BSD systems are genuinely known for their stability and code correctness which is why most people decided to use them on the first place. Rushing to include new software in the ports three without proper testing is seriously going to damage usability of the whole OS. In my understanding ports tree is supporting stable and the current brunch. I am of the opinion that the ports three of the stable branch should not include nothing but the rock solid and tested software. The easiest way for me to check if the port is bleeding edge that is to try to install the same software using binaries. (pkg_add -r) If the binaries do not exist or if the version installed from binaries is older that clearly indicates that the port version is too new to be trusted. I personally found out that Xfce4-panel is not compiling properly on stable and also Orage (calendar for Xfce) While problems with Xfce4-panel are not as serious as with Orage (which is not usable in any shape or form on FreeBSD) they are still serious. The same packages work flawlessly on the OpenBSD. The problem is that ports is maintained by volunteers who are mostly outside of any kind of freebsd core team. I think it is unrealistic to ask port committers to check anything more than to check that the ports build properly. My personal wish list is that opencascade builds on FreeBSD-7 with the new stlport, and that octave-forge not be in its current IGNORE state. But I fully appreciate that I must either wait, or help make it happen. Stephen ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
Le Mar 1 jan 08 à 21:21:43 +0100, Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] écrivait : My personal wish list is that opencascade builds on FreeBSD-7 with the new stlport, and that octave-forge not be in its current IGNORE state. But I fully appreciate that I must either wait, or help make it happen. A patch is ready for that, and is available at http://people.freebsd.org/~thierry/ports/opencascade.diff but I cannot commit it right now: it will fail without the patch included in PR ports/118958. That means that we have to wait untill the ports tree is totally unfrozen. Best regards, -- Th. Thomas. pgpWqpV2KxAfX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mailer question #2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chess Griffin wrote: * Chuck Robey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-12-17 23:28:30]: Any mailers handling those 3 requirements? Some that come to mind are: mozilla-thunderbird, claws-mail, evolution, kmail. Hope this helps. Finally, I got enough of my other problems fixed so I could go back to making my mail the best it could be. I took a look at your suggestions, and decided to try claws-mail first, but trying to figure out what to build, from the pkg-descr's, well, it's confusing, to say the least. You see, the mail/claws-mail/pkg-descr tells me all about (what seems to be a) totally different port, a mail/sylpheed[2]. In fact, when I take a look at the pkg-descrs for either the claws-mail or sylpheed ports, they both seem to be describing the sylpheed port, although they aren't copies, they are very much alike. Could you clear this up? Whats the relationship here, does anyone know it? I'm just trying to figure out what to build, so I can try another mailer for myself. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHeqmyz62J6PPcoOkRAsOJAJ4sogGp3vwcoLETZC1WqhcjuyNPdQCfTyhU zdEmBrcWONX3SJthz9KVpbY= =73CV -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mailer question #2
On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:59:30 -0500 Chuck Robey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Finally, I got enough of my other problems fixed so I could go back to making my mail the best it could be. I took a look at your suggestions, and decided to try claws-mail first, but trying to figure out what to build, from the pkg-descr's, well, it's confusing, to say the least. You see, the mail/claws-mail/pkg-descr tells me all about (what seems to be a) totally different port, a mail/sylpheed[2]. In fact, when I take a look at the pkg-descrs for either the claws-mail or sylpheed ports, they both seem to be describing the sylpheed port, although they aren't copies, they are very much alike. Could you clear this up? Whats the relationship here, does anyone know it? I'm just trying to figure out what to build, so I can try another mailer for myself. This may not be exactly right, but essentially the history is as follows: Sylpheed was the original GTK1 mail client. At some point, there was either a fork or a development version called Sylpheed-Claws. The original Sylpheed became a GTK2 mail client called Sylpheed2. Sylpheed-Claws then changed its name to Claws-mail to avoid confusion, with apparently debatable results. :-) So, today there is Sylpheed2 and Claws-Mail. I use Claws-Mail and Mutt. All the various claws-mail-* ports are extra plugins. It also appears the pkg-descr for Claws-Mail needs to be updated to reference the name change as well as the correct website, www.claws-mail.org. I have prepared a patch for the maintainer and will submit it via GNATS. HTH. -- Chess Griffin GPG Public Key: 0x0C7558C3 http://www.chessgriffin.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Port Version via pkg_add
How does pkg_add determine what version of a port to add when 'pkg_add -Kr' is used? How can I make pkg_add use 6.3 packages instead of 6.2? Thanks, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Port Version via pkg_add
On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 08:10:12PM -0800, Jason C. Wells wrote: How does pkg_add determine what version of a port to add when 'pkg_add -Kr' is used? pkg_add calls getosreldate(3) to obtain the integer value of the release of FreeBSD running on the machine. The list of paths to fetch from are hard-coded based on range comparisons for the above reldate value. See src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add/main.c for a list. How can I make pkg_add use 6.3 packages instead of 6.2? You run pkg_add with a URL that contains packages-6.3-release instead of packages-6.2-release, e.g.: pkg_add -r ftp://ftp4.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6.3-release/Latest/whatever.tbz -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
