On 4 August 2011 18:30, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> Some wiki page, big deal. Doesn't mean we have to use gnome.
Nope. Does not. In the same manner, there is also nothing about gtk.
> It uses the theme, icons and file chooser, that's already a lot for a
> thing that's about looks.
It's really j
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 05:30, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > It's not always possible to make the non-DE users happy. In fact,
> > non-DE users have to adapt to the latest conventions and most
> > importantly, adapt to the norm. It is up to us to see whether an
> > integration works satisfactorily
Excerpts from Ray Rashif's message of 2011-08-04 12:13:45 +0200:
> On 4 August 2011 17:35, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > In this specific case I don't think the upstream name matters much since
> > I even have a hard time figuring out how upstream calls this part of LO.
> > I don't know where the
On 4 August 2011 17:35, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> In this specific case I don't think the upstream name matters much since
> I even have a hard time figuring out how upstream calls this part of LO.
> I don't know where the packager got the name from but it might well have
> been the ubuntu packa
Excerpts from Ray Rashif's message of 2011-08-04 09:02:45 +0200:
> On 4 August 2011 06:35, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > It's not exactly easy to figure out what upstream uses in this case. The
> > only hint I found so far is the gnome_list.txt in the PKGBUILD. I don't
> > know whether the upstrea
On 4 August 2011 06:35, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> It's not exactly easy to figure out what upstream uses in this case. The
> only hint I found so far is the gnome_list.txt in the PKGBUILD. I don't
> know whether the upstream name is very significant in this case.
I think upstream is only keen o
Excerpts from Allan McRae's message of 2011-08-03 23:31:51 +0200:
> On 04/08/11 00:17, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:37:38 +0200:
> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Philipp Überbacher
> >> wrote:
> >>> Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2
On 04/08/11 00:17, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:37:38 +0200:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Philipp Überbacher
wrote:
Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:12:21 +0200:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Mauro Santos wrote:
On
I ran pacman -Syu on two different machines yesterday, one with KDE and
one with xfce. Neither asked me for anything to do with the language and
it reverted to German until I installed libreoffice-en-US. The default
US English had worked fine prior. I also had to do "pacman -S
libreoffice-{base
Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:37:38 +0200:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Philipp Überbacher
> wrote:
> > Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:12:21 +0200:
> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Mauro Santos
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 03-08-2011 07:41, Hector M
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Philipp Überbacher
wrote:
> Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:12:21 +0200:
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Mauro Santos
>> wrote:
>> > On 03-08-2011 07:41, Hector Martinez-Seara wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> I'm aware that recently there has been so
Excerpts from Auguste Pop's message of 2011-08-03 15:12:21 +0200:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Mauro Santos
> wrote:
> > On 03-08-2011 07:41, Hector Martinez-Seara wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I'm aware that recently there has been some changes in libreoffice
> >> package. The problem is that yester
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Mauro Santos wrote:
> On 03-08-2011 07:41, Hector Martinez-Seara wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm aware that recently there has been some changes in libreoffice
>> package. The problem is that yesterday I updated my system and
>> surprisingly only libreoffice-common was updated
On 3 August 2011 14:06, Mauro Santos wrote:
>
>
> My only (small) gripe is that libreoffice-gnome maybe should be called
> libreoffice-gtk.
>
> As a user of xfce I was slightly puzzled but the naming saying gnome as
> it sort of implies that it is specific to gnome, however the description
> clari
On 03-08-2011 07:41, Hector Martinez-Seara wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm aware that recently there has been some changes in libreoffice
> package. The problem is that yesterday I updated my system and
> surprisingly only libreoffice-common was updated. By that I mean that
> I mean that not base, writer, impre
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Yes, that shouldn't be. It's broken the way it is - either the group
> should be renamed, or the provides should be removed.
>
It's not the first time something similar happen. I think of some packages
that have been split and put within a
Am Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:51:06 +0200
schrieb Heiko Baums :
> Definitely provides should be removed. The software is called
> LibreOffice so pacman -S libreoffice is supposed to install the
> complete office suite.
And, btw., libreoffice-common is only a part of libreoffice. So it in
fact doesn't pro
Am Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:39:24 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler :
> Yes, that shouldn't be. It's broken the way it is - either the group
> should be renamed, or the provides should be removed.
Definitely provides should be removed. The software is called
LibreOffice so pacman -S libreoffice is supposed
Am 03.08.2011 09:24, schrieb Auguste Pop:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Guillermo Leira wrote:
>> If you run pacman -Ss libreoffice, you see that there seems to be a
>> libreoffice group. But when you run pacman -S libreoffice, only
>> libreoffice-common is installed...
>>
> i guess that's b
Am Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:41:35 +0300
schrieb Hector Martinez-Seara :
> Hi,
> I'm aware that recently there has been some changes in libreoffice
> package. The problem is that yesterday I updated my system and
> surprisingly only libreoffice-common was updated. By that I mean that
> I mean that not ba
Thanks for your replays,
Hector
On 3 August 2011 10:24, Auguste Pop wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Guillermo Leira wrote:
>> If you run pacman -Ss libreoffice, you see that there seems to be a
>> libreoffice group. But when you run pacman -S libreoffice, only
>> libreoffice-common is
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Guillermo Leira wrote:
> If you run pacman -Ss libreoffice, you see that there seems to be a
> libreoffice group. But when you run pacman -S libreoffice, only
> libreoffice-common is installed...
>
i guess that's because libreoffice-common provides libreoffice. tr
> -Mensaje original-
> De: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org [mailto:arch-general-
> boun...@archlinux.org] En nombre de Auguste Pop
> Enviado el: miércoles, 03 de agosto de 2011 8:59
> Para: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Asunto: Re: [arch-general] Installat
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Hector Martinez-Seara wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm aware that recently there has been some changes in libreoffice
> package. The problem is that yesterday I updated my system and
> surprisingly only libreoffice-common was updated. By that I mean that
> I mean that not base, w
Hi,
I checked the wiki again and I clearly missed the line where it says
how to make the installation now.
pacman -S libreoffice-common
libreoffice-{base,calc,draw,impress,math,writer,gnome,kde4,sdk,sdk-doc}
Still I think we should make a container.
Sorry for the inconvenience,
Hector
On 3 Augus
25 matches
Mail list logo
