Having used Open Office 1.9.x on the XP side of my box, I decided to install it on the CentOS side. (The default OO was 1.1.2, for heaven's sake!) I downloaded the Linux 386 version from the OO site.
I immediately ran into problems-- 1) The installation instructions were for OO 1.x. 2) The download appears to be source RPMs.
Although I've used UNIX & Linux for over 15 years, there are still some empty spots in my toolbox--and dealing with RPMs in one of them. (YUM is SO much nicer!)
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
Where can I find info on what I need to do to get OO1.9.x added to my CentOS installation?
Any help will be much appreciated!
-mj-
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386. Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less. It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on CentOS 4.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on CentOS 4 without issue. CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to build it from source. It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE) requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL Java stack like GCJ. I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on my x86-64 system.
But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency. In fact, I want to say it was actually installed with the RPMs. Now thinking back, it might have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and subsequent run.
That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
I have the -104 download tucked away in my download directory--I'll take a look at it.
Thanks for the tip!
-mj-
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386. Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less. It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on CentOS 4.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on CentOS 4 without issue. CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to build it from source. It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE) requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL Java stack like GCJ. I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on my x86-64 system.
But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency. In fact, I want to say it was actually installed with the RPMs. Now thinking back, it might have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and subsequent run.
That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
Faced the cross-dependency problem when trying to install 1.9.113 on CentOS4-i386.
After fooling around for sometime I downloaded and installed "smart" tool from http://smartpm.org. Then dumped freedesktop and redhat menu RPMS from "desktop integration" folder to "RPMS" folder and ran "smart install *". That did the job nicely
Rgds
Ajay
Quoting Mark Jarvis mark.jarvis@pvmail.maricopa.edu:
I have the -104 download tucked away in my download directory--I'll take a look at it.
Thanks for the tip!
-mj-
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386. Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less. It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on CentOS 4.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on CentOS 4 without issue. CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to build it from source. It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE) requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL Java stack like GCJ. I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on my x86-64 system.
But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency. In fact, I want to say it was actually installed with the RPMs. Now thinking back, it might have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and subsequent run.
That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I like it! I like it!
-mj-
Ajay wrote:
Faced the cross-dependency problem when trying to install 1.9.113 on CentOS4-i386.
After fooling around for sometime I downloaded and installed "smart" tool from http://smartpm.org. Then dumped freedesktop and redhat menu RPMS from "desktop integration" folder to "RPMS" folder and ran "smart install *". That did the job nicely
Rgds
Ajay
Quoting Mark Jarvis mark.jarvis@pvmail.maricopa.edu:
I have the -104 download tucked away in my download directory--I'll take a look at it.
Thanks for the tip!
-mj-
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I immediately ran into problems-- 1) The installation instructions were for OO 1.x. 2) The download appears to be source RPMs.
I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386. Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less. It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on CentOS 4.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on CentOS 4 without issue. CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to build it from source. It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE) requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL Java stack like GCJ. I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on my x86-64 system.
But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency. In fact, I want to say it was actually installed with the RPMs. Now thinking back, it might have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and subsequent run.
That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I downloaded smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm. Since I didn't find any installation notes, etc. on the site, I tried
rpm -ivh --test smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm
for a pre-install check. I got a bunch of errors, missing dependencies, etc. Obviously, I'm missing something.
Suggestions anyone??
-mj-
Mark Jarvis wrote:
I like it! I like it!
-mj-
Ajay wrote:
Faced the cross-dependency problem when trying to install 1.9.113 on CentOS4-i386.
After fooling around for sometime I downloaded and installed "smart" tool from http://smartpm.org. Then dumped freedesktop and redhat menu RPMS from "desktop integration" folder to "RPMS" folder and ran "smart install *". That did the job nicely
Rgds
Ajay
Quoting Mark Jarvis mark.jarvis@pvmail.maricopa.edu:
I have the -104 download tucked away in my download directory--I'll take a look at it.
Thanks for the tip!
-mj-
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I immediately ran into problems-- 1) The installation instructions were for OO 1.x. 2) The download appears to be source RPMs.
I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386. Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less. It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on CentOS 4.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on CentOS 4 without issue. CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to build it from source. It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE) requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL Java stack like GCJ. I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on my x86-64 system.
But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency. In fact, I want to say it was actually installed with the RPMs. Now thinking back, it might have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and subsequent run.
That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 15:37 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
I downloaded smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm. Since I didn't find any installation notes, etc. on the site, I tried
rpm -ivh --test smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm
for a pre-install check. I got a bunch of errors, missing dependencies, etc. Obviously, I'm missing something.
Suggestions anyone??
This thread seems to have drifted OT; however, this work for me:
$ rpm -qi smart Name : smart Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 0.35 Vendor: Dag Apt Repository, http://dag.wieers.com/apt/ Release : 1.2.el4.rf Build Date: Mon 30 May 2005 02:33:22 PM EDT Install Date: Sun 26 Jun 2005 07:35:45 PM EDT Build Host: lisse.leuven.wieers.com Group : Applications/System Source RPM: smart-0.35-1.2.el4.rf.src.rpm Size : 2719284 License: GPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Mon 30 May 2005 02:45:54 PM EDT, Key ID a20e52146b8d79e6 Packager : Dag Wieers dag@wieers.com URL : http://www.smartpm.org/ Summary : Next generation package handling tool Description : Smart Package Manager is a next generation package handling tool.
On 7/13/05, Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote: [SNIP]
It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
Would be grateful for step by step how to for the above. It is a pain explaining to users why flash wont work on x86-64. TIA
Sudev Barar wrote:
On 7/13/05, Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote: [SNIP]
It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
Would be grateful for step by step how to for the above. It is a pain explaining to users why flash wont work on x86-64.
Just use the firefox-...-.i386.rpm and install all your standard plugins, nothing elaborate about it.
Step.1 : yum install firefox.i386 Step.2 : install all your plugins Step.3 : Browse.
- KB
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
Having used Open Office 1.9.x on the XP side of my box, I decided to install it on the CentOS side. (The default OO was 1.1.2, for heaven's sake!) I downloaded the Linux 386 version from the OO site.
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
Although I've used UNIX & Linux for over 15 years, there are still some empty spots in my toolbox--and dealing with RPMs in one of them. (YUM is SO much nicer!)
Yup, but "rpmbuild --rebuild <path_to_src.rpm>" isn't too bad unless you get into dependency hell. I usually put the RPMS in a local repo and use yum to install.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
Well, I see FC4 updates is at openoffice.org-1.9.112-1.1.0.fc4.src.rpm
Rawhide/development has openoffice.org-1.9.116-3.2.0.fc5.src.rpm
Will give a CentOS 4 build of .112 a shot if the DL ever finishes.
Where can I find info on what I need to do to get OO1.9.x added to my CentOS installation?
Any luck with smart?
Phil
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 22:55 -0400, Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
Having used Open Office 1.9.x on the XP side of my box, I decided to install it on the CentOS side. (The default OO was 1.1.2, for heaven's sake!) I downloaded the Linux 386 version from the OO site.
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
Although I've used UNIX & Linux for over 15 years, there are still some empty spots in my toolbox--and dealing with RPMs in one of them. (YUM is SO much nicer!)
Yup, but "rpmbuild --rebuild <path_to_src.rpm>" isn't too bad unless you get into dependency hell. I usually put the RPMS in a local repo and use yum to install.
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
Well, I see FC4 updates is at openoffice.org-1.9.112-1.1.0.fc4.src.rpm
Rawhide/development has openoffice.org-1.9.116-3.2.0.fc5.src.rpm
Will give a CentOS 4 build of .112 a shot if the DL ever finishes.
Well, speaking of dependencies - both fc4 and fc5/rawhide SRPM versions have unsatisfied (and unsatisfiable from available packages) build-deps on CentOS4.
Tried the m113 RPMS found via http://download.openoffice.org/680/index-nojs.html and they work for me on CentOS4 i386 arch, either with or without un- installing the original packages; however on x86_64, fail to do anything when started from the GUI. Just hangs silently when run from the command-line until killed. Any other experiences with the openofficeorg Beta?
Phil
Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
Well, I see FC4 updates is at openoffice.org-1.9.112-1.1.0.fc4.src.rpm Rawhide/development has openoffice.org-1.9.116-3.2.0.fc5.src.rpm Will give a CentOS 4 build of .112 a shot if the DL ever finishes.
I've tried rebuilding ooo-1.9.x on centos4, and the build fails near the end... saying something about a failure registerring the python module (or something like that).
-- Rex
Le Mercredi 13 Juillet 2005 07:36, Mark Jarvis a écrit :
Having used Open Office 1.9.x on the XP side of my box, I decided to install it on the CentOS side. (The default OO was 1.1.2, for heaven's sake!) I downloaded the Linux 386 version from the OO site.
I immediately ran into problems--
- The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
- The download appears to be source RPMs.
Although I've used UNIX & Linux for over 15 years, there are still some empty spots in my toolbox--and dealing with RPMs in one of them. (YUM is SO much nicer!)
Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
I installed 00o 1.9.113 a few days ago on my CentOS 4.1 box without problem, though I uninstalled the 1.1.x version beforehand. I had Sun j2sdk 1.4.2_08 installed too.
Where can I find info on what I need to do to get OO1.9.x added to my CentOS installation?
http://download.openoffice.org/2.0beta/instructions.html#linux You just need unpacking the archive, then a "rpm -Uivh *.rpm" in the directory containing all rpm files should do. I didn't try the desktop integration, though.
-
Ajay -
Bryan J. Smith -
Karanbir Singh -
Mark Jarvis -
Phil Schaffner -
Phil Schaffner -
Rex Dieter -
Sudev Barar -
Vincent Knecht