On 12/08/14 23:42, Kay Schenk wrote: > > > On 08/12/2014 02:20 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: >> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:45:36 -0700 >> Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 08/11/2014 01:53 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would like to propose RC2 based on revision 1616946 from the AOO410 >>>> branch. The build is ongoing and I expect to have the builds available >>>> tomorrow or on Wednesday. >>>> >>>> Further details later ... >>>> >>>> Juergen >>> >>> My current RC1 build has this information -- >>> AOO411m4(Build:9774) - Rev. 1614049 >>> 2014-07-28 17:54 - Linux i686 >>> >>> Proposed RC2 has build number of 9757 so it will not update RC1. >>> >>> Is the build number for RC2 correct? >>> >> >> On linux 64bit (deb) the 9757 build installed without problems and overwrote >> RC1 with no complaints on my PC. >> > > I'm using rpm. Typically I try to do an update rather than force what > rpm thinks is an older version over a newer one -- in this case, 9757 > over 9774. Maybe this was just a digit transposition case. > > All was fine with previous milestones until today. It would be nice for > rpm users if this could be fixed.
you are correct, my mistake with this stupid build number. I switched 5 and 7 in one place. I have to repackage the binaries ... Please stay tuned Juergen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
