Corrupt Installer Errors??

users
#61

For the record:

"Paul":

> False

*What* is false?

Pretty much everything you said (or ever say, for that matter).

There are two 250MB packages of LibreOffice
differing in extension only. That's ridiculous.

Given your history I have good reason to doubt this is even true, but it
may well be, for one reason or another. As I don't know which distro or
repo you are talking about, and what the purpose of this is, I won't
comment further.

Which distro updates software in repositories?

Most of the ones I know. Ubuntu does, Arch does, I'm sure RedHat, SUSE,
Gentoo, Debian and any other popular distro you care to name does as
well.

If you were talking only about updating LO, then you should have
made that clear. And on that specific point I cannot comment without
further research.

#62

2013/10/7 Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk>

Hi :slight_smile:
I once read an amusing article "If operating systems were airplanes". I
couldn't find the one i read but managed to pluck these bits from Zyra's
mad website.

Mac Airlines
All the stewards, captains, baggage handlers, and ticket agents are all
friendly and attractive but all look and act exactly the same. Every time
you ask questions about details, you are gently but firmly told that you
don't need to know, don't want to know, and everything will be done for you
without your ever having to know.

Windows Air
The terminal is pretty and colourful, with friendly stewards, easy baggage
check and boarding, and a smooth take-off. After about 10 minutes in the
air, the plane explodes with no warning whatsoever.

Linux Air
When you board the plane, you are given a seat, four bolts, a wrench and a
copy of the seat-HOWTO.html.
Once settled, the fully adjustable seat is very comfortable, the plane
leaves and arrives on time without a single problem, the in-flight meal is
wonderful. You try to tell customers of the other airlines about the great
trip, but all they can say is, "You had to do what with the seat?"

I think nowadays exploding is less likely but when i replaced it with
"suddenly has to land and take off again" it stopped being so amusing.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

+
​1. :wink:

Henri​

----- Original Message -----
From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster <webmaster@krackedpress.com>
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, 7 October 2013, 15:30
Subject: Re: Installing an OS, was: Fw: [libreoffice-users] Penguins: (Was
Corrupt Installer Errors??)

On 10/06/2013 08:30 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> Hi :slight_smile:
> Usually when you buy a desktop computer it already has Windows
installed. Then after a couple of years the machine has become old and
slow and needs replacing so another Windows machine gets bought. At no
point does anyone install Windows, or at least not many people. People
usually just dispose of it and get a new one
>
> By contrast, when you first start using Gnu&Linux the very first thing
you have to do is install it. Since very few people have any experience
installing any Operating System that usually means learning a lot of very
technical stuff very quickly. None of which you will need to know after
the system has been set-up.
>
> Many people, such as Virgil, get stuck somewhere in the middle of the
set-up&install process. Just as they would be hopelessly lost if they
tried to install Windows. Actually with Windows they typically have a lot
more trouble. Also with Windows they would know that it's an unusual
process and would probably seek help. Whereas with Gnu&Linux they shy away
from help because they want to get established a bit first before risking
asking "stupid questions".
>
>
> Of course that is exactly the wrong way around because once the system
is set-up then it's just simple point&click all the way, just as it is when
you have just bought a Windows machine from a shop. About the only time
you need help with a Gnu&Linux system is while you are first installing it!
>
> Tim at Kracked Press is still very confused about most of the
set-up&install process and has thoroughly weird, screwy, set-ups that i
wouldn't wish on my worst enemy but despite that has been successfully
using Gnu&Linux to do some quite amazing things that i wouldn't even dream
of trying
> Regards from
> Tom :slight_smile:
<snip>

Ha, Ha, Tom

I am not that confused, but I just have not done a lot of manual setups
or scripting on Linux, so a lot is "new" to me.

[What can you expect for a guy that had 3 strokes and not the time or
money to make my home, office, and equipment, the way I should have it.
tee hee tee hee.....]

Well, my setup is not to "screwy" either. It works for me. I just have
a lot of data and other files to deal with.

Yes, I have been using Ubuntu for a few years now. BUT I do not have
any good book on it or Linux in general. Yes, I tend to use a GUI for
my use and not do much in the command line. I learn what I need, when I
need it. I just do not have time to "pay around" with different
commands and packages just to learn how to do more.

I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop, plus some basic [default] KDE packages.
I just find the packages that work for me and use them.

I have 3 drives and one has 3 partitions. /sda has the /home and OS
partition, plus two data partitions. Then the other two drives are a
single partition each. I have a "mess" inside the system due to issues
with the power cabling and such that came with the desktop. But that
can only be fixed with a new power supply and maybe a new motherboard
and case.

ALSO, I have to have half of my living room as my home/office. One wall
is full of shelves of network printers, paper, and most everything else
I need for my home/office use.

Yes, I would love to have an office that did not look a little like a
mad scientist's laboratory, but you have to take what you get and can
afford. [anyone need a mad scientist's monster made for them? well the
transportation might be the issue since villagers tend to want to us
torches every time they see the "thing" heading to the airport.]

#63

Tom wrote:

Mac Airlines
All the stewards, captains, baggage handlers, and ticket agents are all friendly and attractive but all look and act exactly the same. Every time you ask questions about details, you are gently but firmly told that you don't need to know, don't want to know, and everything will be done for you without your ever having to know.

Windows Air
The terminal is pretty and colourful, with friendly stewards, easy baggage check and boarding, and a smooth take-off. After about 10 minutes in the air, the plane explodes with no warning whatsoever.

Linux Air
When you board the plane, you are given a seat, four bolts, a wrench and a copy of the seat-HOWTO.html.
Once settled, the fully adjustable seat is very comfortable, the plane leaves and arrives on time without a single problem, the in-flight meal is wonderful. You try to tell customers of the other airlines about the great trip, but all they can say is, "You had to do what with the seat?"

Tom, this is hilarious and spot on. And, once I figure out the seat and that @#$$% wrench, I'll be a Linux lover, too.

Virgil

#64

I think we would have more Linux users if packages like LO can be
installed with one "click" of the mouse onto the install file as Windows
does with the .msi file. Having to do the terminal commands like "sudo
dpkg -i *.deb " tends to make it a little harder. Maybe just having a
script so all you have to do is type in "sh lib-4.0.5.sh" would make it
easier.

That is the real problem with Linux over Windows - you have to think
more and do more to install a lot of the better packages. Sure there
are those software that have only one .deb or .rpm file, but you still
need to think more using Linux to install software. It is not as easy
as click or double-click on a file name and everything will be done for
you.

BUT, maybe this way is it harder to get those nasty little infections
and wormy things that Windows seen to get all the time. According to
one article, Linux finally got a virus attack, but you had to be really
stupid and allow it to be downloaded and installed via a multi-step
email link.

Yes, it takes a while to get "use to" Linux in whatever flavor you
decide to use. My flavor is Ubuntu with MATE on top of it.

Sure, I do not know much about the terminal commands, but I am a GUI
type of guy. That was one problem I had to overcome with Linux - you
need to use the terminal once in a while. How often does a Win XP,
Vista, or Win7 user has to use its "DOS terminal"? A really lot less
than the Linux users.

I do agree that once you figure out that "blasted wrench" thingy, Linux
gives you a better "ride" than Windows. Also, how many OSs will give
you the "flavor" options for their desktop environment as Linux does?
They tried to do that with Windows before, and even MS tried to get
people to "like" their new one. But when you get down to it, only Linux
has the variety of an ice cream shop. Why go to a shop [OS] that offers
one or two flavors, when there is a better shop that offers 20 or more
flavors to choose from?
.

#65

Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:

I think we would have more Linux users if packages like LO can be
installed with one "click" of the mouse onto the install file as Windows
does with the .msi file.

That can already be done. Generally, if a package is available as an
RPM or DEB file, then clicking on it will run the installer.

#66

Tom wrote:

Mac Airlines
All the stewards, captains, baggage handlers, and ticket agents are
all friendly and attractive but all look and act exactly the same.
Every time you ask questions about details, you are gently but firmly
told that you don't need to know, don't want to know, and everything
will be done for you without your ever having to know.

Windows Air
The terminal is pretty and colourful, with friendly stewards, easy
baggage check and boarding, and a smooth take-off. After about 10
minutes in the air, the plane explodes with no warning whatsoever.

Linux Air
When you board the plane, you are given a seat, four bolts, a wrench
and a copy of the seat-HOWTO.html.
Once settled, the fully adjustable seat is very comfortable, the plane
leaves and arrives on time without a single problem, the in-flight
meal is wonderful. You try to tell customers of the other airlines
about the great trip, but all they can say is, "You had to do what
with the seat?"

Tom, this is hilarious and spot on. And, once I figure out the seat
and that @#$$% wrench, I'll be a Linux lover, too.

Virgil

I think we would have more Linux users if packages like LO can be
installed with one "click" of the mouse onto the install file as Windows
does with the .msi file. Having to do the terminal commands like "sudo
dpkg -i *.deb " tends to make it a little harder. Maybe just having a
script so all you have to do is type in "sh lib-4.0.5.sh" would make it
easier.

That is the real problem with Linux over Windows - you have to think
more and do more to install a lot of the better packages. Sure there
are those software that have only one .deb or .rpm file, but you still
need to think more using Linux to install software. It is not as easy
as click or double-click on a file name and everything will be done for
you.

BUT, maybe this way is it harder to get those nasty little infections
and wormy things that Windows seen to get all the time. According to
one article, Linux finally got a virus attack, but you had to be really
stupid and allow it to be downloaded and installed via a multi-step
email link.

Yes, it takes a while to get "use to" Linux in whatever flavor you
decide to use. My flavor is Ubuntu with MATE on top of it.

Sure, I do not know much about the terminal commands, but I am a GUI
type of guy. That was one problem I had to overcome with Linux - you
need to use the terminal once in a while. How often does a Win XP,
Vista, or Win7 user has to use its "DOS terminal"? A really lot less
than the Linux users.

I do agree that once you figure out that "blasted wrench" thingy, Linux
gives you a better "ride" than Windows. Also, how many OSs will give
you the "flavor" options for their desktop environment as Linux does?
They tried to do that with Windows before, and even MS tried to get
people to "like" their new one. But when you get down to it, only Linux
has the variety of an ice cream shop. Why go to a shop [OS] that offers
one or two flavors, when there is a better shop that offers 20 or more
flavors to choose from?
.
Hi

My observation is that for the many users of Linux, Windows, and Macs
will have about the same experience once installed and configured. I
have a couple of friends who have me take care of the Linux boxes. They
do not seem to have any trouble with Linux once I got it set up
correctly.

The problem is that very few desktops and laptops are sold
with any Linux distro installed. So the user is faced with learning to
install and configure Linux or have someone help them.

#67

Jay Lozier wrote:

My observation is that for the many users of Linux, Windows, and Macs
will have about the same experience once installed and configured. I
have a couple of friends who have me take care of the Linux boxes. They
do not seem to have any trouble with Linux once I got it set up
correctly.

Jay, could you please configure your email program so that it clearly
shows what you are replying to, as my message does here. Your posts
simply show your comments as a continuation of someone else's message.
This makes it difficult to determine what you wrote and what you are
replying to. Her is an example:

I do agree that once you figure out that "blasted wrench" thingy, Linux
gives you a better "ride" than Windows. Also, how many OSs will give
you the "flavor" options for their desktop environment as Linux does?
They tried to do that with Windows before, and even MS tried to get
people to "like" their new one. But when you get down to it, only Linux
has the variety of an ice cream shop. Why go to a shop [OS] that offers
one or two flavors, when there is a better shop that offers 20 or more
flavors to choose from?
.
Hi

My observation is that for the many users of Linux, Windows, and Macs
will have about the same experience once installed and configured. I
have a couple of friends who have me take care of the Linux boxes. They
do not seem to have any trouble with Linux once I got it set up
correctly.

Your text apparently starts from the word "Hi" and there is nothing else
to separate your comments from the previous person's.

Most (all?) email programs should show clearly what you're replying to.
Are you, by chance, just editing and resending a received message,
instead of replying to it? If so, please stop, as your replies are
making it difficult to separate who wrote what comments.

#68

Have you tried to do that for LO?
How many package files need to be run to install LO on a Linux "box"?
There are 52 .deb files to run/install in the 4.1.2 64-bit Debian
install, plus the help pack, plus the language pack if needed.

Like to do a single click or double-click to install all of those files?

Sure, there are complete software packages, like Artha and VLC, that
have a single .deb file, but that is not true for all of the software
out there.

I forget how many commands need to be run just to get MATE installed.

SO
it would be nice to be able to have a single file to run, like with
Windows' .msi file, to install LO on a Debian-based system like my
Ubuntu 12.04LTS. But I have to:
1- uncompress the downloaded file
2 - open the terminal and go to the proper folder/directory created by
the uncompressing
3 - run a command like sudo dpkg -i *.deb
then if you have the older versions, you need to install the "menu" package
4 - do it all over again [steps 1 - 3] for the language packs and help
packs you need to use.

Windows' install is simpler
1 - run the .msi file
2 - make choices in the dialog boxes
3 - let it do all of the rest of the work
4 - install the help pack[s] as needed with a single click or double-click.

#69

Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:

Have you tried to do that for LO?
How many package files need to be run to install LO on a Linux "box"?
There are 52 .deb files to run/install in the 4.1.2 64-bit Debian
install, plus the help pack, plus the language pack if needed.

Like to do a single click or double-click to install all of those files?

The problem is with the way LO is distributed. I have no idea why they
do it that way. There are other programs available where clicking on
the RPM works fine.

#70

Hi :slight_smile:
That is comparing apples and oranges.

Installing a whole DE is more like setting up an OS and not at all just installing a simple program.  Windows doesn't allow people to use a different DE, which is what a lot of the fuss is about wrt Win8.

For most normal programs i use the more complicated "Synaptic Package Manager".  It's search beats googling, then i tick all the extra programs i want to install or try out, when i have chosen all the extra programs i click on the button "Install now".  Job done.

With Windows i have to google it.  Each different program needs to be installed separately and the different installers conflict with each other so i have to keep an eye on which ones finish when so i can start installing the next one.  Each program comes from a different website and there is no real way of having complete confidence in any of those sites being genuine or spoofed (and therefore really giving me malware).

If i do choose the Windows route in Gnu&Linux, as i only do for LibreOffice and Evolution, then i do have to google-it for the instructions which i then copy&paste onto a command-line.  It's possible to use a point&click route but i find it easier to just use copy&paste.  I don't really need to use the ultra-latest LibreOffice so i could choose to stick with whatever gets installed when i install the OS.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#71

James -

I certainly agree that folks oughta use leading markage and such to make
the email conversations easier to follow. Gets aggravating, dunnit?

While we're on these "netiquette" sorta subjects ...
Look how many corners this thread has careened around - complete with
spray of loose gravel. I started this thread ... and it certainly has
been interesting to watch whose front yard it will drive through next!

Lordy - How I miss Newsgroups ... !

;^)

I won't even start on the "Top Posting" v "Bottom Posting" thang.

James Knott ever-so-deftly typed out:

#72

Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:

I think we would have more Linux users if packages like LO can be
installed with one "click" of the mouse onto the install file as Windows
does with the .msi file. Having to do the terminal commands like "sudo
dpkg -i *.deb " tends to make it a little harder. Maybe just having a
script so all you have to do is type in "sh lib-4.0.5.sh" would make it
easier.

I fully agree, based on my experiences over the past couple years experimenting with Linux. My Linux problems have not just been about installation of the OS. They have also included post-installation issues such as installing new applications. I have tried numerous Linux distros in Live CDs, Live USBs, Wubi installations, and true Dual Boot installations. Nearly all of my problems have cropped up *after* the initial OS installation.

I'm an old DOS user from way back. Command lines don't scare me, but I prefer pointing and clicking on a single file to install a program (even if it were an old DOS batch file). This is the primary way in which I believe Linux trails Windows. To me, Linux is like trying to use an incomplete Windows, one that provides *some* GUI access while still requiring the user to use a text-based command line to perform basic tasks. I shouldn't have to install my own seat on the plane!

This is painfully apparent in the various program managers and repositories. At first, I thought it was really cool to use, say, an Ubuntu software manager to simply search for and click on a program to install. It *really* does work slick... until I realized that I've just installed a program that's more than one or two generations old. To get the latest version (even the latest stable version) means downloading multiple files, and running all those "Sudo" commands. Tom mentions copying and pasting the commands from online instructions. Yes, it can be done, and it's not rocket science, but if Linux wants to be considered as a serious Windows alternative, that's not the way to do it.

The proof is in the pudding. I've used both Windows and Linux. To install the latest version of LO in Windows, I click on a single file. To install the latest version of LO in Linux requires multiple steps that I've never even tried to figure out. Like Tom, I tend to simply accept whatever the GUI repository gives me, even if it's not the latest.

Virgil

#73

Hi :slight_smile:
+1
it's a historical problem.  LibreOffice is moving towards a more normal installer.  Sun wasn't keen on such gimmicks when developed by the community.  Go-oo didn't need a decent installer because it didn't develop so fast = so it could settle on whichever version was supplied in the OS.

LibreOffice does develop quickly and people do want to keep up so it kinda does need a normal installer and is developing one. 
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#74

I am coming late to this thread, but this talk of a "single-button" install scares me. I take the downloaded Linux binary LO package and re-package it into a Slackware Linux installation package. I use a script I created to do this and all I have to do when a new LO release comes out is to change the version and run the script. Out comes a Slackware package, ready for installation. I surely hope that any effort going to a single-point installer for LO, which would probably break my process, will not be the only way to install LO in the future, and the current installation scheme will still be an option.
Girvin Herr

#75

I am coming late to this thread, but this talk of a "single-button"
install scares me. I take the downloaded Linux binary LO package and
re-package it into a Slackware Linux installation package. I use a
script I created to do this and all I have to do when a new LO release
comes out is to change the version and run the script. Out comes a
Slackware package, ready for installation. I surely hope that any
effort going to a single-point installer for LO, which would probably
break my process, will not be the only way to install LO in the future,
and the current installation scheme will still be an option.
Girvin Herr

What I have seen with Linux "one-click" installers is they actually
invoke the distro software installer. This requires user confirmation
before the install occurs (password entry). So it is as secure as any
other package installation. The "one-click" installers are normally
distro (distro family) specific.

Currently I have two versions of LO installed, one from the repository
and a downloaded version.

#76

Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:

This is painfully apparent in the various program managers and
repositories. At first, I thought it was really cool to use, say, an
Ubuntu software manager to simply search for and click on a program
to install. It *really* does work slick... until I realized that I've
just installed a program that's more than one or two generations old.

It's worth noting that this may be especially true for LO (I don't
know either way), and some other software that releases often, but it's
not true for all software in repositories.

To get the latest version (even the latest stable version) means
downloading multiple files, and running all those "Sudo" commands.

This depends on the software and how they package it. Again, it may be
especially true for LO, but not for all software.

On both Windows and linux, one can build from source to get the
bleeding edge, and that is an involved process for both OSen.

Barring that, on Windows one relies on using the latest packaged
install file (which usually is *not* the absolute latest code), and on
linux one relies on either the latest developer's package, or the latest
repository package. The difference is that on Windows the latest
installer is usually built by the developers themselves, and therefore
is mostly current, whereas the repository package for linux is built by
a third party, and therefore lags behind (to varying degrees). *If* the
developers themselves have built a package for your distro, then it is
sometimes current, and sometimes lags behind the Windows one because
they are not as interested in linux (usually due to lack of demand),
and it can be just as easy to install as the Windows installer, or more
difficult, depending on how the developers chose to build the package.

There is nothing inherent in linux that makes it harder (barring the
sheer number of distros; see below), it depends purely on how much
effort the developers are willing to go to for any particular linux
distro.

One big difference is the number of linux distros, which makes it
harder to release software that will meet every linux user's needs. On
windows, mostly the different versions all work the same (*mostly*),
and one installer will suffice, but on linux that isn't the case, which
is why packaging is sometimes left up to repository maintainers, and
then the current-ness (is that even a word?) of the software depends on
how interested in the software those maintainers are. While this is
true even for software that has no windows version, this basically
boils down to "Windows is more popular, so people put more effort into
making stuff easier".

I've even had quite the opposite case with some software that was
released primarily for linux, and I've had to get my Windows install
from a third party. In that case the windows install lagged quite a bit
behind the linux one.

Just saying, the harder time installing on linux may be true of LO, but
is surely not the case for all software. It largely depends on the
amount of effort the developers are willing to put in for your
preferred distro/OS.

Paul

#77

Paul wrote:

There is nothing inherent in linux that makes it harder (barring the
sheer number of distros; see below), it depends purely on how much
effort the developers are willing to go to for any particular linux
distro.

Don't forget, LO is included in many distros. It might not be the
absolute latest, but it would be farily recent.

#78

<snip>
Yes, Slackware calls its install system "pkgtools", which includes the "installpkg", "removepkg", and "upgradepkg" command line tools. My concern is that the LO developers will create their own installer, which could make it tough for me to repackage the LO distributions, depending on how they implement it. Of course, I could always compile the source code, but that can be another can of worms and it takes a lot longer to compile LO than to just repackage the already compiled binary. I am not sure what your definition of "distro" is in your reply above. It could mean the LO distro or the Linux distro, in my case Slackware.

I do not like using supplied package installers. The only one I know of and do use is the Adobe Acrobat Reader installer. Every time I use it, I shudder because I do not know exactly what is going on in there. Computer security is a high priority with me and I generally do not install such programs unless I have no choice, such as with AR. Generally, such package installers need to be run as root and that is a no-no with me. Luckily, so far, AR's installer has been just an extractor and does not need to be run as root, so I can run it in user mode, repackage the extracted binary into a Slackware package and then install that as root. So far, I have been lucky there. It is a matter of who do I trust.
Take care.
Girvin Herr

#79

Hi :slight_smile:
I suspect that a lot of your concerns and more besides are shared by the LO devs and in some cases by the companies they work for.

My guess is that is part of the reason we don't already have 1-click installers.  We already have at least 2 systems that work (repos and copy&paste from instructions) so there is nothing driving them to produce some hasty bodge in the "release early and release often" style.  Another, slightly wilder, guess is that you might need to do 1 extra step = such as unzipping a container-file (as we can do with .odt files).

This whole topic, about 1-click installers, is a "chinese whisper" (not sure why the Chinese get the blame for it as we all do it).  It would be better for one or 2 of us to contact the devs to initially find out
1.  If there is a plan or vague idea to create 1-click installers for the 3 or 4 ways of packaging such things for Gnu&Linux (maybe and Bsd?) 
If there is then 2 follow-up questions arise
2.  How imminent are such plans?  Soon or years away?  
3.  Are compiled binaries going to be available? (perhaps in .deb or .rpm form for people to repackage for various distros such as Slackware (or use tools such as the alien thing))

At the moment we are all just making guesses based on something that 1 person thinks they might vaguely remember having heard or read about some time ago.  With no proof or links to anything to suggest that vague memory has any basis in fact.  Errr, that 1 person was me so i deeply apologise for that and for not intervening sooner [hangs head in shame] [shuffles feet]

Apols and regards from 
Tom :slight_smile:

#80

But I like compiling from source complains the battle scared OS
pioneer!

[1]http://lifehacker.com/398611/how-to-compile-software-from-source-cod
e

Hi :slight_smile:

I suspect that a lot of your concerns and more besides are shared by

the

LO devs and in some cases by the companies they work for.

My guess is that is part of the reason we don't already have 1-click

installers. We already have at least 2 systems that work (repos and

copy&paste from instructions) so there is nothing driving them to

produce

some hasty bodge in the "release early and release often" style.

Another, slightly wilder, guess is that you might need to do 1 extra

step

= such as unzipping a container-file (as we can do with .odt files).

This whole topic, about 1-click installers, is a "chinese whisper"

(not

sure why the Chinese get the blame for it as we all do it). It would

be

better for one or 2 of us to contact the devs to initially find out

1. If there is a plan or vague idea to create 1-click installers for

the

3 or 4 ways of packaging such things for Gnu&Linux (maybe and Bsd?)

If there is then 2 follow-up questions arise

2. How imminent are such plans? Soon or years away?

3. Are compiled binaries going to be available? (perhaps in .deb or

.rpm

form for people to repackage for various distros such as Slackware

(or

use tools such as the alien thing))

At the moment we are all just making guesses based on something that

1

person thinks they might vaguely remember having heard or read about

some

time ago. With no proof or links to anything to suggest that vague

memory has any basis in fact. Errr, that 1 person was me so i deeply

apologise for that and for not intervening sooner [hangs head in

shame]

[shuffles feet]

Apols and regards from

Tom :slight_smile:

________________________________

From: Girvin Herr <girvin.herr@sbcglobal.net>

To: users@global.libreoffice.org

Sent: Wednesday, 9 October 2013, 0:35

Subject: Re: Installing an OS, was: Fw: [libreoffice-users] Penguins:

(Was Corrupt Installer Errors??)

<snip />

Of course, I could always compile the source

code, but that can be another can of worms and it takes a lot longer

to

compile LO than to just repackage the already compiled binary. I am

not

sure what your definition of "distro" is in your reply above. It

could

mean the LO distro or the Linux distro, in my case Slackware.

<snip />

Generally, such package installers need to be run as root and that is

a

no-no with me.

<snip />

Take care.

Girvin Herr

--

To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org

Problems?

http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/

Posting guidelines + more:

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette

List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/

All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot

be