On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Robinson Tryon wrote
Version: 4.1.0.1
Build ID: 1b3956717a60d6ac35b133d7b0a0f5eb55e9155
The Updater only knows about the following 4.1.0.1 builds:
'43286d64e6126b0915ae60d89d3177018fe63b9' = '4.1.0.1', # rc1
(buildfix1)
Hi qubit
Robinson Tryon wrote
Based on my understanding of the updating mechanism (see the section
Upgrade Logic), your 4.1.0.1 install should give you an offer to
upgrade to 4.1.3 now. Could you please check that out?
Yes, it should. But it doesn't.
On another laptop with version 3.6.5.2
Hi Christian, *,
Am 25.11.2013 14:32, schrieb Christian Lohmaier:
Hi Pedro, *,
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Based on my understanding of the updating mechanism (see the section
Upgrade Logic), your 4.1.0.1 install should give you an offer to
upgrade to 4.1.3
Hi Christian, all
Christian Lohmaier-3 wrote
Anyway, I did reset it back to the version that's in the repo=the
version that should get you the update.
Thank you for the fix. I didn't quite understand the git part... Does this
mean that you updated the version information manually or that you
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Christian, all
Christian Lohmaier-3 wrote
Anyway, I did reset it back to the version that's in the repo=the
version that should get you the update.
Great!
Apparently the version check algorithm only works correctly for
Hi Pedro, *,
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Christian Lohmaier-3 wrote
Anyway, I did reset it back to the version that's in the repo=the
version that should get you the update.
Thank you for the fix. I didn't quite understand the git part...
There is a git
Hi Christian, Robinson, all
Christian Lohmaier-3 wrote
Version 4.1.0.1 still reports that LibreOffice 4.1 is up to date. and
version 3.6.7.1 still reports LibreOffice 3.6 is up to date.
Can you tell what version those report as? I.e. what git-hash they have?
Version: 4.1.0.1
Build ID:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Christian, Robinson, all
Can you tell what version those report as? I.e. what git-hash they have?
Version: 4.1.0.1
Build ID: 1b3956717a60d6ac35b133d7b0a0f5eb55e9155
The Updater only knows about the following 4.1.0.1 builds:
Good morning Robinson, *,
On Dienstag, 26. November 2013 00:08 Robinson Tryon wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
[AutoUpdater does not work on Win]
The Updater only knows about the following 4.1.0.1 builds:
'43286d64e6126b0915ae60d89d3177018fe63b9' =
Ping! Any news?
Did anyone read
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/How-long-before-a-released-build-is-notified-by-Update-tp4082780p4083805.html
?
Regards,
Pedro
--
View this message in context:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
I just checked for updates on a laptop I haven't used for a while. The
installed version is 4.1.0.1 but Check for Updates returned LibreOffice 4.1
is up to date. Interesting... :)
Some notes on the updater are available here:
Hi qubit
Robinson Tryon wrote
It doesn't sound to absurd to me. I really don't know too much about
the mechanisms of the updater, so let me get some info on the current
state of things, and then I can see the feasibility of particular
improvements.
I just checked for updates on a laptop I
Hi all
Does any one know what is the rule for a released build to be detected by
Auto-update (or manual update) check?
Version 4.1.3 was released on November 1st but my LO 4.1.2.3 still reports
LibreOffice 4.1 is up to date.
Is there a problem with version 4.1.3? Or is simply the version on the
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all
Does any one know what is the rule for a released build to be detected by
Auto-update (or manual update) check?
Version 4.1.3 was released on November 1st but my LO 4.1.2.3 still reports
LibreOffice 4.1 is up to date.
Hi Robinson (Rob? qubit?)
Robinson Tryon wrote
AFAIK the update system is (still) handled manually. I think Cloph is
the one in charge of it right now. I'm not sure exactly how we could
automate the process, but I think it's worth our investigation.
As you know I'm not a Developer so you can
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Robinson (Rob? qubit?)
Well 'Rob' - Rob Snelders, in the QA namespace, but the other two are
collision-free, AFAIK :-)
Wouldn't it be possible to have a script checking on
16 matches
Mail list logo