On Wed, 2017 Mar 29 09:58+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> Or one can Recommends: it in libreoffice. Yeah.
Well, I guess that would let me do what I originally wanted...
# apt-get install libreoffice libreoffice-java-common-
(note the minus at the end)
to install LibreOffice without the
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:09:39PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 09:35+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > >
> > > If LibreOffice is installed without Java runtime support, then how
> > > is the failed installation of Java-based third-party extensions a
> > > problem? That
On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 09:35+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > If LibreOffice is installed without Java runtime support, then how
> > is the failed installation of Java-based third-party extensions a
> > problem? That is exactly what should happen.
>
> But people out there don't know what their exte
On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 08:36+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > > That installation would fail with a non clear message if the Java
> > > support is not there. -> Bad.
> > >
> > > We had that "fun" in the past...
> >
> > So, there are Java-based LibreOffice extension packages that do not
> > properly
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:28:31AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 08:36+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > >
> > > > That installation would fail with a non clear message if the Java
> > > > support is not there. -> Bad.
> > > >
> > > > We had that "fun" in the past...
> > >
> >
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 01:49:04AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Mon, 2017 Mar 27 11:01+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > The metapackage is supposed to install (mostly) everything.
> >
> > This includes the Java stuff.
> >
> > Think of people wanting to install extensions (which happen to
On Mon, 2017 Mar 27 11:01+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> The metapackage is supposed to install (mostly) everything.
>
> This includes the Java stuff.
>
> Think of people wanting to install extensions (which happen to be
> written in Java more often than I'd like it but it's a fact...).
>
> That i
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:57:58AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> What about the hard dependency of "libreoffice" on lo-java-common? This
> package is just a dependency of components that need Java, so it is not
> appropriate for the metapackage.
The metapackage is supposed to install (mos
On Sun, 2017 Mar 26 10:12+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> > Right. I'd like to be able to say, let's not install that package
> > (lo-java-common), and end up with a clean install of LO sans Java
> > stuff.
>
> You can do that right now, too. Just avoid the Java-using modules. You
> already were on
Hi,
oops.
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 10:12:01AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> They are not. If you used one of them (which you probably won't run into
> given even the wizards are Java) you get told you want Java. Basically it's
[...] are NOT java anymore but python [...]
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 01:18:00AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> Of course. I don't care too much which specific components need Java
> (unless e.g. Writer one day starts requiring it); I just want to tell
> apt-get "no Java!" and let it do its thing.
Then install the various modules manu
Hi Rene,
On Sat, 2017 Mar 25 23:54+0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> Because you install the metapackage which installs those "all
> components". And libreoffice-base (well, its internal database) _is
> written in Java_.
My intention is to install LibreOffice as a whole minus the Java stuff.
As I
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:10:35AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> [...] *And* it will also tell people to install libreoffice-java-common [...]
Actually that's untrue - the patch is disabled, probably because it didn't apply
anymore and it was forgotten to update.. ;/
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:01:53AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:00:22PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> > # apt-get -s install libreoffice default-jre- | grep '^Inst' | egrep
> > 'jre|jdk|java'
> > Inst libreoffice-java-common (1:5.2.5-2 Debian:testing [
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:00:22PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> # apt-get -s install libreoffice default-jre- | grep '^Inst' | egrep
> 'jre|jdk|java'
> Inst libreoffice-java-common (1:5.2.5-2 Debian:testing [all])
>
> Hunh, that worked. The lo-java-common package went in, even t
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 858655 wishlist
Bug #858655 [src:libreoffice] Please move Java dependencies to
libreoffice-java-common
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal'
> tag 858655 + wontfix
Bug #858655 [src:libreoffice] Please move Java dependencies to
libreo
severity 858655 wishlist
tag 858655 + wontfix
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:00:22PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> A regular LibreOffice install has many Java dependencies:
>
> # apt-get -s install libreoffice | grep '^Inst' | egrep 'jre|jdk|java'
Description-en: office productiv
Package: src:libreoffice
Version: 1:5.2.5-2
I am interested in the topic of installing LibreOffice without Java.
This is possible, of course, but this bug report is concerned with a
dependency structure that makes this needlessly messy.
A regular LibreOffice install has many Java dependencies:
18 matches
Mail list logo
