Hi Jack ..
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 08:12:08PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> The patch that I have for libgcc-compat causes the code to be built
>with or without gcc-3.1 being used for the build. If you are finding
>that soffice fails due to an illegal instruction, you might try rebuilding
>glibc
Jan,
The patch that I have for libgcc-compat causes the code to be built
with or without gcc-3.1 being used for the build. If you are finding
that soffice fails due to an illegal instruction, you might try rebuilding
glibc 2.2.5 under gcc 2.95.4 and see if that causes the symbols to be
resolved.
Repository: oo-deb/debian
who:gromitt
time: Tue Jul 9 23:10:28 UTC 2002
Log Message:
Enable building prj and libs of OOo with debugging-symbols by setting
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=debug debian/rules buildprj ,
dropping copiing mozlibs into OOo source for PPC, I will link against
sys
Repository: oo-deb/debian
who:haggai
time: Tue Jul 9 19:37:15 UTC 2002
Log Message:
openoffice.org (1.0.0-pre1.0.1rc2) experimental; urgency=low
* Recompiled against fixed libstlport package
* Change user directory to ~/OpenOffice.org1.0.1. Note there is
*no suppo
Repository: oo-deb/debian/local
who:haggai
time: Tue Jul 9 19:37:15 UTC 2002
Log Message:
openoffice.org (1.0.0-pre1.0.1rc2) experimental; urgency=low
* Recompiled against fixed libstlport package
* Change user directory to ~/OpenOffice.org1.0.1. Note there is
*no
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 09:44:17PM +0200, Markus Baumeister wrote:
> probably I'm the 395th who writes but the openoffice.org-bin package
> 1.0.0-6 ist broken. It depends on libstlport4.5gcc3 but the respective
> package is called libstlport4.5gcc3.0 or libstlport4.5gcc3.1 (under
> woody-testing
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 07:10:55PM +0200, Malte Cornils wrote:
> Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 18:49 schrieb Malte Cornils:
> > I've just tested the new openoffice version (pre-1.1), there are two
> > problematic aspects. [...]
Only two? :)
Sorry, my upload was too early - I discovered them just after
7 matches
Mail list logo