Re: OO 1.0.2 backported to woody

On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:52:49AM +0100, Chris Halls wrote: > Hi Adrian, Hi Chris, > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:15:22AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I've backported OpenOffice.org 1.0.2 to woody and added these packages > > to a larger collection of packages I do maintain [1]. > > What exact

Re: OO 1.0.2 backported to woody

Hi Adrian, On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:15:22AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > I've backported OpenOffice.org 1.0.2 to woody and added these packages > to a larger collection of packages I do maintain [1]. What exactly is the reason for putting another set of packages into circulation? Were you unha

Re: OO 1.0.2 backported to woody

Adrian Bunk wrote: FYI: I've backported OpenOffice.org 1.0.2 to woody and added these packages to a larger collection of packages I do maintain [1]. I've run into a problem because of this. I want to use the "official" packages for Woody instead of yours. But revision number make my apt-get p

OO 1.0.2 backported to woody

FYI: I've backported OpenOffice.org 1.0.2 to woody and added these packages to a larger collection of packages I do maintain [1]. Notes regarding these packages: - they are compiled using a backported gcc 3.2.1 - as a workaround for the problem with the same file in several packages each open