incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <>
Subject Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Date Wed, 16 May 2012 19:48:27 GMT

On 16.05.2012 19:27, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>> make sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>> versions.
>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts
>> also exist in the forum.
>>  From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>> update functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>> Update<>(plus
a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat>  for non-Windows platforms)
>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>> response from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>> was forcibly closed by the remote host.
>> There are two solutions:
>> (A) "static" solution:
>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
>> GET request to the above given URL is made.
>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>> - German, Windows
>> - German, MacOS X
>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>> - English-US, Windows
>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
>> update functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user
>> demand.
>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>> this "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be
>> given here. The update functionality can open it in the user's default
>> browser on corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I
>> included our AOO 3.4 release announcement page as this landing page - this
>> is only a proposal.
>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>> Linux 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>> have no package. We could create a special landing page for these which
>> state that AOO 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if
>> one of the provided packages would fit her/his needs.
>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>> URL.
> Oliver--
> Hi. OK, a dumb question...have you ascertained that this doc actually
> works? That is, have you tested it with some sort of URL redirect?

I am testing with my test XML documents on
I am not using redirects. Instead I am adjusting my version.ini resp. versionrc 

> Right now, we have an area on the web server that could house
> /projects/update36/ProductUpdateService
> If you overwrite check.Update with this file, and do a local host setup,
> your own /etc/hosts, and redirect to
> you could test it out

I will test it.

> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
> acceptable package was not found.

 From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the HTTP 
server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.

> Your analysis about just leading linux folks to the url of a page for an
> update is great, but what to do about the existing information?

Sorry, but I do not know what you mean by "what to do about the existing 

> Anyway, copy your doc over to the web server, setup the redirect, and let
> us know how things go.

Yes, I will.

Best regards, Oliver.

View raw message