Update to 3.6.1

users
#21

You've been mis-informed - WIN does have 64.

     As far as I know, only Windows does not have a 64 bit version. Linux

#22

I believe that Tom and I were talking about LibreOffice on Windows. I have a 64 bit computer which had VISTA running until I replace that with Ubuntu. But LO does not have a 64 bit LO version which I thought was the train of thought.

--Dan

anne-ology wrote:

#23

so I'm using both 32 & 64 on this machine ???

       ok, I believe you;
            now just another question -
            could this be the reason for so many bugs? -
               [seems as if this list has been listing quite a few
recently, some I've never even seen ???]

     I believe that Tom and I were talking about LibreOffice on Windows. I

#24

Hi :slight_smile:
Reason for so many problems in last couple of weeks is the new release of a new branch of LO.

Each new branch should try to add as much functionality as it reasonably can to attract new people and to give the devs a chance to really show-off and get on with interesting things.  Unfortunately the side-effect is that unexpected things and often completely unrelated things that 'shouldnt' be affected sometimes go wrong.  Roughly the equivalent of going out to buy an ice-cream and getting back to find a magpie built a nest in your filing cabinet.

As a branch matures the devs fix those problems (and longer-standing issues) and include their fixes in the "service packs".  So 3.6.1 is likely to have less problems and then the 3.6.2 has even less and so on until it reaches around 3.6.4.

But by then it has become less exciting to work on so a lot of the devs will have drifted over to new functionality that will be added in the next new branch.  Not all devs want exciting new toys, many have a tendency to worry a specific problem to death but that can often become an unhealthy obsession too.  A fresh pair of eyes can sometimes spot where a dev has managed to shake something loose and come up with a simpler answer.

After months of detailed work on a specific issue a dev might then be into chasign shiny new toys for a while (or just leave the project and run screaming from the room).  Hopefully people that chase shiny new toys sometimes get sucked into getting bogged down in a single issue again.  For some people i would guess that's a repeating cycle.

Of course many of the companies that support LO do invest employee dev-time into LO and they get a lot less choice about what they work on, so their burn-out rates are probably higher.

Just my thoughts really.  Any stereotype fails in the light of reality. 
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#25

Thanks for your response.

       This makes me so glad that I do not upgrade anything immediately -
           I'd rather wait until all the kinks are removed.

Hi :slight_smile:

#26

After all that fuss, for which I apologise profusely, it turned out that the file didn't exist! If the diagnostic had been a little more accurate we could all have avoided this nonsense, especially about Java 1.7_06 which now works perfectly well in my context on several installations and various machines.

Why didn't the file exist, you may ask? I had tidied (?) up my directory structures and the file in question was moved elsewhere. Talk about a red face!

Peter HB

#27

Hi :slight_smile:
Java is still a Pita generally though.  Well worth avioding if you can.

New branches are still more about fancy new features and better compatibility at the expense of stability = but i wouldn't want to change that.  It's good to have the choice.

Glad to hear you sorted your issue out nicely tho!  Congrats! :slight_smile:
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#28

Hi :slight_smile:
Then you (and loads of other people because a lot of us do the same thing)  miss out on the chance to get your particular pet-hates dealt with while almost every dev is most interested in the new branch = and that means you can't use the shiny new toys until after they have become less exciting.

I do the same btw, lol
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#29

Hi :slight_smile:
Yes, imagine you had a tube 64cm wide.  Now you can roll balls down it that are 64cm wide AND balls that are only 32cm wide.  The hardware allows 64bit so 32bit is easy.

The problem arises if some piece of software is picky about who it deals with.  If a 64bit program refuses to acknowledge there might be 32bit chunks to deal with then there are going to be problems.  The hardware has no problems with getting chunks of either size.

If you choose to run a 32bit OS on a 64bit machine then 'obviously' you can't run 64bit apps on it.  The 32bit OS would be like putting a 32cm tube inside the 64cm hardware tube.

Programs run inside the OS.  The OS runs inside the hardware.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#30

yikes, the more I learn of these machines, the dumber I feel :wink:

Hi :slight_smile: