disappearing letter

doug11 · April 13, 2012, 6:01pm

I just modified a previous letter, which was a previously sent FAX,
and went to save the modified version, which had a fair amount of
work in it. When I said "save" I got a fast-disappearing message,
something about java, and the whole document disappeared. I
have since discovered that the document can be "recovered,"
altho I didn't know it at the time, so I typed it over again using
WordPerfect in Windows. I really don't like your program
much, but it's almost the only game in town on Linux, and this
behavior does not make me any fonder of it! (The other
options are worse.)

--doug

e-letter · April 14, 2012, 9:27am

I just modified a previous letter, which was a previously sent FAX,
and went to save the modified version, which had a fair amount of
work in it. When I said "save" I got a fast-disappearing message,
something about java, and the whole document disappeared. I
have since discovered that the document can be "recovered,"
altho I didn't know it at the time, so I typed it over again using
WordPerfect in Windows. I really don't like your program
much, but it's almost the only game in town on Linux, and this
behavior does not make me any fonder of it! (The other
options are worse.)

Maybe the mistake was to send this fax document before saving it?
Anyway, since java functionality seems to be the cause, java may be
the partial/primary cause of the document crash. Also, could be a m$
problem, assuming the document was first created within m$. Tried
abiword, or enscript?

doug11 · April 14, 2012, 5:15pm

I saved and sent the original. I had to make a modification and send
the mod. No Microsoft product involved. I do not even own a M/S
word processor. I have tried abiword, and it is terrible. I haven't
heard of enscript, and I will look into it. I sure wish there was a
new version of WordPerfect for Linux--the original from 1995 won't
load. (Unlike many Linuxers, I am not averse to paying for a
product that does the job I need and does it better than the
"home-grown" product.)

--doug

planas · April 14, 2012, 8:35pm

What version of Java are you using?

doug11 · April 14, 2012, 8:53pm

According to Symantic, I have installed a batch of Java 1.5.0.22-2pclos2010,
and a batch of java 1.6.0.31pclos2012. I have no idea what LibreOffice uses, or
why both these sets of java files are installed, but I wouldn't dare change them.

If someone reading this thinks there should be something else, I will forward
the message on to the devs at pclos and see what they say.

--doug

Tom_Davies · April 14, 2012, 11:48pm

Hi
You can see what version of java is being used in LibreOffice by going to

Tools - Options - Java

Hopefully you will see both version of java listed. You should be able to see which one is selected and the tick-box should hopefully show that java is being used.
Regards from
Tom

What version of Java are you using?

According to Symantic, I have installed a batch of Java 1.5.0.22-2pclos2010,
and a batch of java 1.6.0.31pclos2012. I have no idea what LibreOffice uses, or
why both these sets of java files are installed, but I wouldn't dare change them.

If someone reading this thinks there should be something else, I will forward
the message on to the devs at pclos and see what they say.

--doug

doug11 · April 15, 2012, 12:08am

Following instructions, I find both versions of java listed, but neither one checked.
I found that I could check one or the other, but not both--stands to reason, I guess.
I hit "revert" and they both became unchecked again. So should one be checked,
and if so, which?

--doug

planas · April 15, 2012, 1:08am

What are the version listed?

Nicolas_Adamo · April 15, 2012, 1:18am

On 04/14/2012 10:08 PM, Jay Lozier wrote:On
      04/14/2012 08:08 PM, Doug wrote:On 04/14/2012 07:48 PM, Tom Davies wrote:Hi :)You can see what version of java is being used in LibreOffice
          by going toTools - Options - JavaHopefully you will see both version of java listed.You
          should be able to see which one is selected and the tick-box
          should hopefully show that java is being used. Regards fromTom :)Following instructions, I find both versions of java listed, but
        neither one checked.I found that I could check one or the other, but not
        both--stands to reason, I guess.I hit "revert" and they both became unchecked again.So should
        one be checked,and if so, which?--dougWhat are the version listed?He wrote:According to Symantic, I have installed a batch of Java
      1.5.0.22-2pclos2010,and a batch of java 1.6.0.31pclos2012.I have no idea what
      LibreOffice uses, orwhy both these sets of java files are installed, but I wouldn't
      dare change them.If someone reading this thinks there should be something else, I
      will forwardthe message on to the devs at pclos and see what they say.--dougMy case: Archlinux with LibreOffice 3.5.1.2 Build ID:
    350m1(Build:102)Java: Sun Microsystems Inc. 1.6.0_24 (Shouldn't it say Oracle's??)Regards,Nicols

doug11 · April 15, 2012, 1:28am

Sun Microsystems Inc. 1.6.0_31
Sun Microsystems Inc. 1.5.0_22

Shown in that order.

--doug

planas · April 15, 2012, 1:32am

I would try 1.6.0_31 first. If I did not like how LO performed, slow loading, etc. then I would try 1.5.0_22. Oracle is working on 1.7.0 so I am concerned about bugs and vulnerabilities in 1.5.0

Brian_Barker · April 15, 2012, 1:42am

Interestingly, the embedded company name was changed from Sun to Oracle in version 1.6.0_21, but this caused some programs using it to fail - so it had to be changed back. See http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6969236 .

Brian Barker

Tom_Davies · April 15, 2012, 7:18am

Hi
Ahh, i thought that was
1.6.0_31 and
1.6.0_22
in which case both versions are worth trying. Most recent first of course. The 6_22 was joint-2nd best for earlier releases of LibreOffice but the 3.5.x prefers more recent versions, ideally the 7_3.

Any 5_22 really needs to be uninstalled although it probably is best to ask in your distros forums/mailing-list before doing that jic something does need it.. On the other hand you could just uninstall it and see what happens (if anything) and then perhaps reinstall afterwards. I would back-up the /home first, before testing, jic. On a gnu&linux system you are considerably safer but java 5 is so old that there are bound to be shed loads of malware that are able to compromise most machines through it.

I don't think Oracle is working on the 7_0 anymore as it was allegedly exploited even before it got released. Similarly with the 7_1 and 7_2! Last time i checked they were working on the 7_3.

I hadn't realised that java used to be owned by Sun. There didn't used to be much trouble with it and so i was wondering why java suddenly became such a hugely vulnerable mess about a year or 2 ago. Apparently even Macs got exploited through the 6_29!

Presumably Oracle are going to start charging people to use their latest versions of java at some point and it would be easier for them to do that if the whole thing took this type of nose-dive so that people became more aware of the dangers of using older versions.

Libreoffice devs are trying to write-out any dependence on java so it's only needed for a few things now. Just a few wizards (maybe), some Extensions and Base if you use the embedded back-end or perhaps HSqlDb as an external back-end.
Regards from
Tom

Tom_Davies · April 15, 2012, 7:38am

Hi
The 6_24 was the first one that seemed to cause slow-downs in earlier versions of LibreOffice, 3.3.x and 3.4.x branches (prior to 3.4.5). More recent versions of java seem to have often caused crashes as well as slowdowns. The best version seems to have been the 6_21. That seemed to be the pinnacle for those early LOs.

LibreOffice 3.5.x and 3.4.5&3.4.6 seem to prefer the newest possible versions of java, preferring ultra-latest versions such as 7_3 even before they get released.

On Gnu&Linux you are considerably safer than if you were running Windows or even Mac. Mac started with unix-based security so they tend to be significantly safer but they are a proprietary system so presumably they are not able to respond so quickly to threats. I think making something proprietary introduces other potential vulnerabilities anyway even though that is contra-intuitive.
Regards from
Tom

NoOp · April 16, 2012, 9:34pm

...

Right...

You keep promoting earlier versions of Java, I guess you've not heard
what happened to Apple for not updating their Java versions:

<https://support.apple.com/kb/HT5228>
<<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57410476-37/apples-security-code-of-silence-a-big-problem/>>
<http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/04/14/apples-flashback-fixes-three-belts-and-a-pair-of-suspenders/?iid=HP_LN>

Tom_Davies · April 17, 2012, 1:13am

Hi Gary
Hmm, no, that is not what i said at all. You seem to decide what i am going to say before reading my post and then ignore anything i say that contradicts what you decided. Still, at least that makes it easier for you to criticise what you decided i said.

As for the voracity of Ed Bott and cronies 'articles' they seem to be quick to point out the 1 or 2 bits of malware that surface every few years against Mac (which generally gets patched quite quickly) while completely ignoring the thousands of similar threats against Windows. Would a similar threat out in the wild even get reported if it brought Windows machines down? Obviously not, because it happens so often in Windows that people would be bored of hearing about them.
Regards from
Tom

e-letter · April 17, 2012, 11:51am

Off-topic, but why don't people using ibm java and openjdk more?

Tom_Davies · April 17, 2012, 1:41pm

Hi
There is currently a court-case about this between Oracle and Google. Oracle appear to be claiming that code released and patented by Sun and released under a GPL has been copied by Google for use in Android. The OpenJDK is not independent of Oracle.

From the IBM website

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/newto/
"OpenJDKOpenJDK is a free and open source implementation of the Java
       programming language, available under the GPLv2 license.
       In October 2010, IBM, previously the main corporate contributor of the competing Apache
       Harmony project, formed an alliance with Oracle to support OpenJDK and create a single, stable
       platform for Java development."So 'IBM Java' is tied to Oracle too.

Ok, in theory being on a GPL means the code could be forked from by any other project or organisation but Google appear to be in hot water for doing just that.

The court-case as proposed by Oracle is based on who holds certain patents and seems to be avoiding the issue about licenses. I don't understand the ins-and-outs and haven't even read GrokLaw about it so the articles i base my personal opinions on could easily have got completely the wrong story and then i have "read between the lines" and arrived at something even more inaccurate.

Regards from
Tom