[blfs-dev] libreoffice-4.1.1

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Fri Aug 30 15:15:33 PDT 2013

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 06:47:55PM -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Installing in /opt/libreoffice- is as easy as changing replacing
> the prefix. I have always used in /opt/.., not in /usr. Is it OK to
> change the page so that the user is left with the choice between the two?
> I never use the dependencies: Redland-1.0.16 (which requires
> Rasqal-0.9.30 > Raptor-2.0.10, all started by R's), OpenLDAP-2.4.36,
> Berkeley DB-6.0.20 and unixODBC-2.3.1. Is it OK to move them to Optional?
> Python 2 can be used, instead of Python 3 (this is how I use). Is it OK
> to add in Recommended 2 as alternative to 3?

 How do you tell it to use Python 2 ?  I've been installing 3 solely
for LO-4.  As I said privately, I install all of the above *except*
OpenLDAP and unixODBC and I seen no reason to use them on a regular
desktop.  For a company-wide installation, maybe.

 One other question - is this version a release, or is it labelled
as alpha or beta on the splash screen ?  I noted the label on the
current version, perhaps that is why there are so many xml errors in
the languages - but it does seem to work ok.
> Thanks, Ken, for discussing these matters with me.
> BTW:
> Bruce, is ok to use my system with corrected glibc for development and
> tag 7.4? I did tag the java and icedtea-web using it.
> Can we go on tagging packages, or need to reinstall everything from
> scratch? I think I am not the only one in doubt about this.
 I think I sowed some of those doubts !  At that time, Bruce hadn't
confirmed what he was going to include in -rc2.  With *only* glibc
changed, and that by reverting one thing to how it used to be in
2.17, I don't think there is any likelihood of problems.  Still got
to test (I'm building LFS at the moment), but my guess is we should
just keep on tagging.

das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list