Hartmut Figge: >Perhaps i should consider using the source myself, because of > >hafi@i5_64 ~ $ loffice >/usr/bin/loffice: line 2: 12258 Illegal instruction >/usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/soffice "$@" > >which i just got with an i5. Should i?
That would give me these new packages Calculating dependencies... done! [ebuild N ] virtual/fortran-0 0 kB [ebuild N ] dev-libs/libevent-2.0.16 0 kB [ebuild N ] sys-process/time-1.7-r1 101 kB [ebuild N ] app-admin/eselect-boost-0.3 0 kB [ebuild N ] dev-util/boost-build-1.46.1 41,017 kB [ebuild N ] virtual/perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.024 0 kB [ebuild N ] x11-themes/gnome-icon-theme-3.2.1.2 13,682 kB [ebuild N ] dev-libs/boost-1.46.1-r1 0 kB [ebuild N ] dev-perl/Archive-Zip-1.300.0 193 kB [ebuild N ] sci-libs/hdf5-1.8.4-r1 7,013 kB [ebuild N ] sci-libs/fftw-3.2.2 3,414 kB [ebuild N ] virtual/freedesktop-icon-theme-0 0 kB [ebuild N ] media-libs/vigra-1.7.1-r1 27,814 kB [ebuild N ] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9.2.20 0 kB [ebuild N ] dev-util/mdds-0.5.3-r1 90 kB [ebuild N ] app-office/libreoffice-3.4.5.2 240,214 kB Total: 16 packages (16 new), >Should i wait for a fixed libreoffice-bin? Hm. libreoffice-bin doesn't require the above packages. Perhaps it failes therefore? *g* Hartmut -- Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/ Von Usern fuer User :-)
