incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Linux install issues
Date Tue, 22 May 2012 00:18:19 GMT
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> wrote:

> @Kay,
>
> I believe the dialog is still there for optionally setting associations
> for .doc, .ppt, and .xls works.  I should double-check that too.  But there
> is definitely no detection that .odt, .ods, .odp, etc., are already
> assigned to an application other than OpenOffice.org, and no polite request
> or warning.
>

oh -- I see


>
> I need to do this on purpose under repeatable test conditions and capture
> details for a bug report.  But I have seen it too often without warning of
> any kind during installs I was conducting for other purposes.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> (It is too late to complain about the silent, automatic removal of earlier
> OO.o versions.  It would have been good to follow the LibreOffice precedent
> of having OpenOffice3.4 start its own install directory, etc., just as the
> 3.x versions of LO do.)
>

Yeah-- I don't think that's happening for Linux. I included a "to do" on
this for Linux users on the revised Install Guide I put out today as it's
basically required to get things to work.

 I don't work on windows. Install instructions for Linux state where the
installation will go. Many Linux folks know how to control the actual
installation area if they want to.

Dennis, it might be very helpful for you to make some changes to the
Windows install instructions in--

http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html

to address some of your concerns. If you have them, I'm sure others do too.
You could add in there how to install to an alternate area, etc.

I didn't spend any time at all looking at the Windows information, and
didn't receive feedback about a month ago when I first started working on
this.
Please fix as you see the need.

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 15:43
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> Subject: Re: Linux install issues
>
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> > wrote:
>
> > I am not changing anything.  I don't think there is any such thing as
> > owning file names and it is too late to claim them now.  And that doesn't
> > matter.  What matters is the impact on users and on the cost of
> supporting
> > them with the present arrangement.
> >
> >  - Dennis
> >
> > PS: I am also annoyed by the heavy-handed way that AOO 3.4.0 stomps on
> > existing file associations too.
> >
>
> no advance warning? asking politely?
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juergen Schmidt [mailto:jogischmidt@googlemail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 13:56
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> > Subject: Re: Linux install issues
> >
> > Am Samstag, 19. Mai 2012 um 19:32 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
> >
> >        One enduring solution would be to break with the past and not use
> > the same file names for the binary bits, the same registry keys, etc.,
> any
> > longer. That would solve a few problems on Windows too.
> >
> >
> > I think we own the name and we are probably not the project who should
> > change any names.
> > We should be careful with this kind of changes because we can potentially
> > break a lot of existing projects who rely on names, registry entries etc.
> >
> > So please be careful with such changes without deeper analysis what
> > depends in this...
> >
> > Juergen
> >
> >
> >        - Dennis
> >
> >        -----Original Message-----
> >        From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com]
> >        Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 10:01
> >        To: ooo-dev
> >        Subject: Linux install issues
> >
> >        Hi all--
> >
> >        It seems we are running into a number of very difficult problems
> > with Linux
> >        installs, the latest just e-mailed to this list this morning, due
> > to the
> >        way some vendors have installed LO.
> >
> >        see:
> >
> >        http://markmail.org/message/qz72ouzjvcm7uyfn
> >
> >
> >        I'd really like to provide additional help in the install guide:
> >
> >        http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html
> >
> >        but I'm at a loss as to what this should say.
> >
> >        I took a look at SOME of the postings on the support forums and
> > well, still
> >        at a loss. Generally, it seems that completely uninstall the old
> > OOo 3.3 is
> >        a given (please correct me if I'm wrong about this), but how to
> > handle some
> >        of the LO overlap?
> >
> >        Can we get some opinions on what's the most accurate way to go
> about
> >        installing AOO 3.4 on linux?
> >
> >        * completely de-install LO first? install AOO 3.4, the re-install
> > LO?
> >        * completely de-install old OOo 3.3? and then?
> >
> >        Thankfully, I did not run into these kinds of issues with my
> distro.
> >
> >        --
> >
> >
>  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >        MzK
> >
> >        "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
> >        -- Mark Twain
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
>                                 -- Mark Twain
>
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
                                 -- Mark Twain

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message