| 1 |
On Wednesday 06 July 2011 12:08:45 Frank Peters wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 00:22:33 -0500 |
| 3 |
> Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Take a look at this page:> http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Downgrade_Glibc> |
| 5 |
> > And also this forum topic:> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-845000- |
| 6 |
start-0.html |
| 7 |
> Thanks for these links. |
| 8 |
> What a mess! In my case there would be no problem becauseabsolutely nothing |
| 9 |
was built against the new glibc. |
| 10 |
> However, I found another solution. I did not realize thatGentoo offers a |
| 11 |
binary OpenOffice package. Installingthis openoffice-bin package now gives me |
| 12 |
an OpenOfficethat starts with the new glibc update. |
| 13 |
> So the new question is why does the binary from OO/LOfail to start while the |
| 14 |
Gentoo binary shows no problem?AFAIK they are the same package, but the |
| 15 |
directory structuresare different. |
| 16 |
> Anyway, I'm glad to have OO running. |
| 17 |
> Frank Peters |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
one is compiled by the ooo guys for some setup they consider 'standard'. The |
| 20 |
other compiled against gentoo stable tree. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Huge differences. Really. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
#163933 |
Archives