Corrupt Installer Errors??

users
#81

Economies of scale! When I worked at the mall they paid someone to do
the gift wrapping around Christmas time which many people enjoyed as it
saved them the time! Although my boss passed this wisdom onto me: "The
Wrapping is the only attractive part of the whole operation, there's
nothing quite like the thrill of getting a papercut while struggle to
box up something as awkward as a blow up doll" Okay that's being a
little bit cynical, I am trying not to imply that the work of TDF have
gone and produced a fully open source adult toy which is very fun to
play with! However there are these like that on the market which run on
the FLOSS model!
See here:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/25/body-hacks-building-abody-hacks-building-an-open-source-theremin-like-vibratorn-open-source-theramin-like-vibrator/

I personally would like to see someone such as Nixie Pixel as a calender
girl for Libreoffice, The marketing strategy here would be amazing!
http://www.youtube.com/user/NixiePixel

#82

Well if you use Ubuntu's LTS [long term support] OS you upgrade the OS
every two years. There is a lot of changes in LO over even a year's
worth of time, let alone two.

#83

Well, having a simple script available for each of the 4 Linux downloads
would be nice.

The sh install-lo-4.0.5.sh type of script could have all the needed
steps from the un-archiving, to the removal of the previous version, to
the install of the package itself.

Let the script do all the heavy typing and make it easier for the user
to install LO.

That would not be too hard. correct?

It would not be a "single click" but it would reduce the needed typing
and other work by the users to get LO installed on their [say] 64-bit
Debian based system.

I keep forgetting the command to "safely" remove the previous version of
LO when I want to go from 4.0.5 to 4.1.2, for example. Last time I
know, you needed to remove the previous version of LO even for
installing 4.0.5 when the previous version was 4.0.3 or .4.

#84

so sounds like you should look into a 'rolling release' like LMDE or Linux Mint Debian Edition or Manjaro.

my systems desperately need updating so I guess I feel little need to be up2date.

I don't know how these releases treat LO; in this discussion we need to be careful not to confuse the difficulties of upgrading LO with supposed difficulties of upgrading the operating system.

F.

#85

> Well if you use Ubuntu's LTS [long term support] OS you upgrade the
> OS every two years. There is a lot of changes in LO over even a
> year's worth of time, let alone two.

But packages in a repository get updated during those years, you don't
just stay on the latest version at the time of the LTS release. At
least, it works this way for other software, I'm rather certain that it
does for LO too.

so sounds like you should look into a 'rolling release' like LMDE or
Linux Mint Debian Edition or Manjaro.

My personal favourite rolling release distro is Arch Linux. It is
simple and clean, but it is more work to set up. That extra work is
part of the point of Arch: it keeps things clean and lean, and means
that you get to know your system better.

Paul

#86

For Ubuntu [since 10.04 LTS] I have been downloading the 64-bit Debian
install files for my system instead of using the repository. Currently
my system shows 3.5.7 in the repository instead of the 4.0.5 that is the
current version of that line.

I do not use Mint due to a problem with some network printers. It sees
them if I plug in the USB cables, but will not see them as available
network printers. Mint has both MATE [which I use] and Cinnamon for the
GNOME 2.6-ish desktop environment. I prefer the old style of GNOME
desktop over GNOME 3.x or Unity.

I use the LTS, or long term support, versions of Ubuntu instead of
upgrading it twice a year. I do not know what you mean by "rolling
release", but I really hate it when every few months you have to deal
with a new release of an OS or some major change in a software package.
GIMP's version for 12.04 is good, but the 13.04 and Windows versions now
require you to "export" and not "save as" any image format that is not
their internal default. I use to just save my files to JPG, but the new
versions require you to export the file to JPG, or PNG, or GIF. Things
like that type of change make me mad.

Sure, I keep up with LO, but I do not install every new version, every
time it comes out. That is not what I prefer to do. I run 4.0.5 on
Ubuntu, but I am thinking about installing 4.1.2 soon. I have 4.1.2 on
my Win7 laptop, currently.

As for keeping it up-to-date, well I keep the update manager checking on
a daily basis for updates to my desktop. Every few days there seems to
be a few updated packages to install. I just do not upgrade my OS
version every time a new one comes out.

#87

yeah, I forgot to mention Arch, the archbishop of rolling releases.

I've never tried it; not sure how much better I need to know my system.

plus I use the Trinity Desktop (TDE) which is a nice hold-over from KDE3 and I simply don't know if it can be set up in Arch or not. maybe will look into it when I have another spell of the romance of getting to know my system. in fact the one I'm writing from now is way overdue for an overhaul, way over.

F.

#88

The link leads to "not found", at least for me.

#89

Robert Holtzman wrote:

> 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

The link leads to "not found", at least for me.

Did you notice that "e" that wound up on the next line? You may have to
add it to the URL.

#90

With or without the e the link will get you to that site, however the blog post provides a link to an actual tutorial on webmonkey which results in a 404 error. The date of the post on lifehacker goes back to 2008 so it's likely that the tutorial on webmonkey has been removed.

#91

In most cases, I do compile from source. It is the safest way to make sure the dependencies are there and the resulting package works on my system. However, the last time I built OpenOffice (admittedly a *long* time ago), it took over 3 hours on a 1.5 GHz Athlon machine. Now the latest LO, being larger, will most likely take even longer. As a result, I just repackage the downloaded LO binaries (rpms). Obviously, compiling from source is not for everybody.
Girvin Herr

#92

<snip>

<http://www.webaugur.com/bazaar/53-what-if-operating-systems-were-airlines.html>
" What if Operating Systems Were Airlines?

    Published on Friday, 01 February 2002 00:00
    Written by David L Norris "

#93

Thanks for the link. It's amazing how little has changed in 11+ years.

Virgil

#94

PPA for each line?

is there one that will get you 4.0.6 when it comes out
and another to give you 4.1.2 is you have 4.0.5?

I prefer to choose the line/version I want. That is why I have been
installing them "manually".

ALSO
where can you find the link[s] to the PPA[s]?
I do not remember seeing it published anywhere.

#95

So the PPA has the newest version of both branches.

Does that mean that the newest that will be updated to right now will be
4.1.2, but in a few weeks the update manager will see that 4.0.6 is the
newest and try to update your 4.1.2 back to that one?

#96

My browser adds it automagically. That's not the link that doesn't work.
It's the "Compile Software From Source Code" link one layer down.
Without that the site is of little use.

#97

Hi :slight_smile:
No, it's just 1 PPA.  If you want an older version then you kinda have to go back to the LO site.  The PPA only has the most recent version although i think that might be the latest from each of the 2 current branches
Regards from 
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi :slight_smile:
in *buntu and clones just add the LO PPA to stay really quite
up-to-date.  "Simples"

Most stuff doesn't really need updating that much anyway.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

PPA for each line?

is there one that will get you 4.0.6 when it comes out
and another to give you 4.1.2 is you have 4.0.5?

I prefer to choose the line/version I want.  That is why I have been
installing them "manually".

ALSO
where can you find the link[s] to the PPA[s]?
I do not remember seeing it published anywhere.

#98

Hi :slight_smile:
in *buntu and clones just add the LO PPA to stay really quite up-to-date.  "Simples"

Most stuff doesn't really need updating that much anyway.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#99

Broken link replacement: Compile from source code?
Try this:
<http://www.webmonkey.com/2010/02/compile_software_from_source_code/>

#100

I do not know if I will be using the PPA for the 4.0.6 install, but it
will be a while before I use 4.1.x.

FOR install commands I now use. . . .

     "sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*"
     . . . . then do the standard "dpkg -i *.deb" terminal install.

I found that there was a show-stopper for the font selection, for 4.1.2,
that caused the drop box to go back to the top while I was trying to
scroll down the list to change the font of a few cells in a Calc file.
I had tried it every way I knew how and it just kept going back to the
top of the list instead of continuing to scroll down. I could not even
get past Arial on the list before the jump back to the top. For me,
that is a show-stopper, even if I do not use Calc often.

I really hate it when there is a problem with the font scrolling, or
viewing. I have over 600 fonts in my font folder on my desktop and
somewhere about 400 on my laptop's font folder[s]. Since I use a lot of
specialty fonts for the holidays [like letters made out of bones or
letters in Christmas trees, and such] I really tend to build up the
number of specialty fonts during the holliday seasons.

This is the second or third time a version has had this font drop box
scrolling problem or being able to display all of the fonts installed.

Hi :slight_smile:
Sorry all! I just googled for the PPA and found this page
https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+archive/ppa

Apparently each different branch of LO has it's own page and the above
page has a link to each of those. So you can choose to have a really
old branch using that way if you want. They do list links to the
4.1.x and 4.0.x branches even though they are not quite legacy yet!

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

So the PPA has the newest version of both branches.

Does that mean that the newest that will be updated to right now will be
4.1.2, but in a few weeks the update manager will see that 4.0.6 is the
newest and try to update your 4.1.2 back to that one?

> Hi :slight_smile:
> No, it's just 1 PPA. If you want an older version then you kinda have
> to go back to the LO site. The PPA only has the most recent version
> although i think that might be the latest from each of the 2 current
> branches
> Regards from
> Tom :slight_smile:
>

<snip>