| 1 |
Dirk Heinrichs wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Donnerstag 20 November 2008 14:14:25 schrieb ext Dirk Uys: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Another reason is that OO is reputed for having a very complicated |
| 6 |
>> build system that takes up a lot of resources to complete. Depending |
| 7 |
>> on the hardware you are doing this on "using a binary package that |
| 8 |
>> most likely doesn't fit into your otherwise self-compiled system" may |
| 9 |
>> not be that idiotic. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> If my hardware is not compilation friendly, I'd use a binary distribution and |
| 13 |
> end up with an OOo that fits into the system (given that the maintainers of |
| 14 |
> the chosen distribution also compiled the package from sources). |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Bye... |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Dirk |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I agree, if you are going to use a OS that is source based, you need to |
| 22 |
be source based. It may take 6 or 7 hours to compile OOo on my rig but |
| 23 |
everything on my system is compiled as far as I know. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Also, isn't whether a person uses a binary or not up the the person in |
| 26 |
the chair? Why is it that every time someone comes here to get help |
| 27 |
with OOo that a comment is made to install the binary? That is not |
| 28 |
exactly a fix for the problem. I have read about problems with the |
| 29 |
binary version too and the compiled version will work fine. Let the |
| 30 |
person that owns the puter make up their own mind. It's not our place |
| 31 |
to tell them what packages to install unless they ask. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Dale |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
:-) :-) |
Archives