When will LibreOffice 3.5.1 be available? (System: OpenSUSE 12.1 + KDE 4.7.2) LibO is a stable and bugfixing version of LibO 3.5.0 and should be available for OpenSUSE 12.1 I think. It’s also nowhere to find in the OBS.
Besides that: after several months of experiencie with the OBS I think the OBS is rather rubbish, userunfriendly and above all very confusing for end users. Too many apps and their packages in the OBS just don’t work properly and for an average end user it’s confusing to pick the right version. I’m longing back to the good old Packman times.
On 2012-03-19 18:36, wfranssen wrote:
>
> When will LibreOffice 3.5.1 be available? (System: OpenSUSE 12.1 + KDE
> 4.7.2) LibO is a stable and bugfixing version of LibO 3.5.0 and should
> be available for OpenSUSE 12.1 I think. It’s also nowhere to find in the
> OBS.
There are two main OBS sites for LiBO - STABLE and UNSTABLE. If it is not
there, then wait. If you wait and it is not, wait more.
If you do not want to wait, offer your help to them.
I can not check now because the site is down. Oh, it’s back - this is the
official information site:
> Besides that: after several months of experiencie with the OBS I think
> the OBS is rather rubbish, userunfriendly and above all very confusing
> for end users. Too many apps and their packages in the OBS just don’t
> work properly and for an average end user it’s confusing to pick the
> right version. I’m longing back to the good old Packman times.
Mmmm… 
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
This is your second post (at least) mentioning a lot of non-working software from OBS. Examples please? And, do you report bugs?
OK, I’ll wait.
If you do not want to wait, offer your help to them.
OK, I’ll wait.
I’m not a contributor, I’m not a packager or a maintainer, I can not compile. And I don’t have the intention to learn it. As an average end user I just use any software or operating system just to work with it.
Cheers and have fun.
On 2012-03-20 01:56, wfranssen wrote:
>
> OK, I’ll wait.
You can also try to find out who does the job and ask them, politely 
From the little I have heard, 3.5 requires the previous version to be
uninstalled completely first, and this may be blocking its packaging.
You must understand that a lot of the work is being done by volunteers, not
paid professionals. They will not be happy to hear their hard effort
denigrated. There is always room for improvement, but they do what they can.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
Just one example you can read in my thread multimedia tuxguitar.
It’s just one example of an app that’s not working, or not working out of the box. In earlier days when Packman was still fully alive and kicking their TuxGuitar package was perfect and worked flawlessly. Since the migration of most of the Packman packages this is no longer the case for - imho - too many applications/packages.
Other one: WinFF 1.4.2 (all available versions) is missing working presets. It simply doesn’t work. So I’ve installed version 1.4.0 from code.google.com. This one works fine. WinFF from Packman always worked without any problem.
Should I send bugreports? To whom of the maintainers/packagers of which version? Come on.
And so there is a remarkable list to make. In my experience as an average end user with a.o OBS there is something fundamentally wrong with this concept. End users like me have no idea which version to pick from many applications in the OBS. This concept might be useful for developpers, maintainers and packagers, but it is not for an average user. I have nothing against OpenSuse or its community or whatsoever, I just try to point out a symptom that I consider as not useful for users. I just expect common applications will work out of the box. If that can’t be understood by the several different communities, well we should wonder why OpenSuse is trying to gain “market share” at all. IT’S ALL ABOUT THE END USERS.
Cheers, and have fun
On 2012-03-20 02:36, wfranssen wrote:
>
> Just one example you can read in my thread multimedia tuxguitar.
From which repo did you download it? Because there are two possibilities at
least.
> In earlier days when Packman was still fully alive and
Notice that if there is a reason for a package to be in packman, as typical
for multimedia, there is a chance that it will never work right if you use
an openSUSE version. I suppose I don’t need to explain why.
> Other one: WinFF 1.4.2 (all available versions) is missing working
> presets.
Winff is not available in the buildservice. If you count the home repos,
then it is, but you are not supposed to install from them - unless the
owner tells you it is ok.
> Should I send bugreports? To whom of the maintainers/packagers of which
> version? Come on.
To the one that packages it. There is a published procedure.
However, if you are installing from home repos, forget it. You can not even
complain here, it is your fault for installing a non published package. You
can tell the packager, that’s all - provided he told you it was ok to
install from his playground.
And, being winff what it is, it will never work right if you download it
from openSUSE. I suppose I don’t need to explain why. You’d better ask in
the multimedia forum for a replacement that you can get from packman.
There is of course room for improvement in the buildservice. I agree the
thing is not well organized, there have been discussions about this in the
project. But as I said before, this is a volunteer effort. You are welcome
to help
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
wfranssen wrote:
>
> OK, I’ll wait.
>
>
I agree with all the comments. But you do have another alternative.
Download and install the version from the LibreOffice Website. I’ve been
running 3.5.1 for sometime from there. No real problems sofar. I mainly
use Calc and writer.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/
The only thing you have to remember it is installed into /opt instead
the the openSUSE path. This could be changed. Not being a programmer, I
just installed into /opt. Will reinstall when openSUSE version runs. The
downloaded one has some different Icons also, but again its a problem.
Hope this helps you.
Incidentally, when you installed LO from their site do you get any icons in KDE?
When I tried it, I uninstalled LO first and then installed 3.5.1 and did the desktop
integration bit. LO works perfectly I just don’t have any icons in the kde ‘start’ menu
Ta
M
interele wrote:
>
> Incidentally, when you installed LO from their site do you get any
> icons in KDE?
> When I tried it, I uninstalled LO first and then installed 3.5.1 and
> did the desktop
> integration bit. LO works perfectly I just don’t have any icons in the
> kde ‘start’ menu
>
> Ta
>
> M
>
>
I got Icons, They appear to be in package Liboffice3.5 (3.5.1-101). when
installed they are located in /opt/libreoffice3.5/share/xdg. Note I used
the default directory for 3.5 not the normal one opensuse uses. That
allowed me to have both 3.5 and the opensuse 3.4 version until I was
sure 3.5 worked.
I have a problem with the printer admin icon not desplaying the text
description of what the icon is, but it does work.
Hope this help you.
Also, if you install 3.5 from the libreoffice site and it looks terrible. You may want to investigate the following. If you run libreoffice from the command line and you get the following error
(soffice:3748): Gtk-WARNING **: /opt/libreoffice3.5/program/../ure-link/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.11' not found (required by /usr/lib64/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so)
then what’s happening is that it is using an internal library named libstdc++.so.6. And your toolbar is going to look like this
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/62642289/UglyIcons/snapshot12.png
In order to remedy the problem you can initiate the following command. (Word of caution: I have not determined if this breaks anything else in the program but initial tests have not introduced any more errors)
sudo mv /opt/libreoffice3.5/ure/lib/libstdc++.so.6 /opt/libreoffice3.5/ure/lib/libstdc++.so.6.old
this will allow the gtk look and feel to load correctly and your toolbar should look like this.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/62642289/UglyIcons/snapshot13.png
IMHO When it doesn’t load the correct look and feel there seems to be some heavy lines introduced between sets of icons making the program feel as though it’s running on win95.
>Notice that if there is a reason for a package to be in packman, as typical
>for multimedia, there is a chance that it will never work right if you use
>an openSUSE version. I suppose I don’t need to explain why.
Yes. Yes you do.
>Winff is not available in the buildservice. If you count the home repos,
>then it is, but you are not supposed to install from them - unless the
>owner tells you it is ok.
Now let’s not start getting like the old Sidux. The whole point of the Open Build Service is to allow end users to create packages. “Open Build Service is a generic system to build and distribute packages from sources in an automatic, consistent and reproducible way. Release your software for a wide range of operating systems and hardware architectures.”
If the original poster is encountering a lot of packages that have built correctly but don’t work correctly, then this is a legitimate complaint and may require considering options such as giving OBS account-holders pages or flags to list the status of their builds (say, testing or beta) and ways for users to leave feedback/bug reports for the package maintainers.
>However, if you are installing from home repos, forget it. You can not even
>complain here, it is your fault for installing a non published package. You
>can tell the packager, that’s all - provided he told you it was ok to
>install from his playground.
Again, this smacks of Sidux, which had a list of 10,000 rules users were supposed to follow. Sidux was alleged to be perfect and any faults were because the user violated one of the 10,000 rules. It was almost to the degree that if you changed the wallpaper you were told that this was the reason you had problems and were attacked in the forums.
OBS isn’t a private playground. It allows the wider community to quickly and easily create packages for the latest software for OpenSUSE (and other distros). It’s one of OpenSUSE’s advantages over other distros - the ability to find the latest and greatest of almost any package on OBS and then install with One-Click Install. Please don’t discourage users from taking advantage of this feature. Installing a package that’s not bundled with OpenSUSE isn’t a mistake or error and thus not anyone’s “fault”.
> But as I said before, this is a volunteer effort. You are welcome
>to help
It doesn’t sound very welcoming when we dismiss a user’s experience or dismiss all of the non-official packages (and packagers) in OBS. The packagers are trying to help by providing more packages and/or the latest packages for OpenSUSE users, and the poster is trying to help by explaining some of the problems they’ve been having and attempting to open up a dialog. The “invitation to help” here is being used in a “I don’t see you doing anything better” way and thus it’s being used to shut down/shut up someone rather than genuinely help them assist the project. It’s closing a door rather than opening one.
On 2012-03-31 21:26, duncreg wrote:
>
>> Notice that if there is a reason for a package to be in packman, as typical
>> for multimedia, there is a chance that it will never work right if you use
>> an openSUSE version. I suppose I don’t need to explain why.
>
> Yes. Yes you do.
Ok. openSUSE can not distribute a package that is protected by patents or
other restrictions valid in the USA. But packman can.
Thus we install the multimedia packages from packman replacing the packages
of same name distributed by openSUSE.
This fact is documented and published in many places. For example
here or
here or
here
>> However, if you are installing from home repos, forget it. You can not even
>> complain here, it is your fault for installing a non published package. You
>> can tell the packager, that’s all - provided he told you it was ok to
>> install from his playground.
>
> Again, this smacks of Sidux, which had a list of 10,000 rules users
I have no idea what sidux is.
> OBS isn’t a private playground.
The home repos are the private playgrounds of their owners. You are not
supposed to install from them unless their owners tell you explicitly that
you can.
That’s why home repos do not appear on a search.
>> But as I said before, this is a volunteer effort. You are welcome
>> to help
>
> It doesn’t sound very welcoming when we dismiss a user’s experience or
> dismiss all of the non-official packages (and packagers) in OBS. The
> packagers are trying to help by providing more packages and/or the
> latest packages for OpenSUSE users, and the poster -is- trying to help
> by explaining some of the problems they’ve been having and attempting to
> open up a dialog.
There are rules… you have to learn the rules of the playfield.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
I agree with this comment. I think openSUSE’s 1-click install is just great (much more convenient than adding ppa’s and stuff), but it is so easy to mess up your system by adding wrong repos.
I wish there is a way to classify (not by their names, but by tags, categories, whatever) repos to stable/unstable. There are a lot of variation in stability among home repos. So It would be great to have an option to exclude home repos which are flagged as unstable in software search. Sometimes when you actually go to an obs project the author says "Users should not use this repo … " If the author could flag this repo as unstable and exclude it from users’ search results, it would reduce the probability of mistakenly adding this repo greatly.
-Joon
On 2012-04-01 07:36, joonpy wrote:
> I wish there is a way to classify (not by their names, but by tags,
> categories, whatever) repos to stable/unstable. There are a lot of
> variation in stability among home repos. So It would be great to have an
> option to exclude home repos which are flagged as unstable in software
> search.
All home repos are excluded in searches, by default. ALL of them. You can
change the default, but that is your doing, and it is assumed you know what
you are doing. If you don’t… well, it is your problem 
Yes, information on the OBS could be improved, that’s certain. You might
propose and discuss this in the project mail list, where you can reach the
decision makers.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 06:36:02 +0530, wfranssen
<wfranssen@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>
> If you do not want to wait, offer your help to them.
>
> OK, I’ll wait.
> I’m not a contributor, I’m not a packager or a maintainer, I can not
> compile. And I don’t have the intention to learn it. As an average end
> user I just use any software or operating system just to work with it.
> Cheers and have fun.
>
my libreoffice got updated today to 3.5.2, from the LO-unstable repo
(http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/LibreOffice:/Unstable/ ).
haven’t used it extensively yet, but it appears to work fine.
–
phani.
Besides that: after several months of experiencie with the OBS I think the OBS is rather rubbish, userunfriendly and above all very confusing for end users. Too many apps and their packages in the OBS just don’t work properly and for an average end user it’s confusing to pick the right version. I’m longing back to the good old Packman times.
That would be because the OpenSUSE Build Service is developer oriented rather than end-user oriented. As a regular end user, you’re basically supposed to leave your repositories alone, save for the Packman exception.
As a more knowledgeable or daring user, you might eventually try some of the OBS repositories that feed into Factory/ (e.g., Science/ or Application:Geo/). Repositories under “user:” however, should be left alone unless you’re a developer yourself or are willing to help out in some way, or as Carlos says elsewhere, the repository owner has told you it’s OK to install from there (but that’s just his word).
In short, OBS is what it says on the tin: a software build service. It is not part of the official distribution.
By the way, I am confused by the comparison between the OBS and Packman, as the purposes of each are quite orthogonal.