Re: Star Office Installation

--- "Bannerman, Israel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To all: > > I just downloaded Star Office and I am trying to > install the application. > > Before downloading the file I did: > > mkdir -m 0755 /usr/local/soffice > chown me /usr/local/soffice > > I then downloaded the application to th

RE: Star Office Installation -- oh oh! Another problem

rael israel 15247168 Mar 4 04:51 > sop-5_2-ga-bin-linux-en.bin > > > Thanks alot! > -Israel Bannerman > > -Original Message- > From: Bob Thibodeau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 7:28 PM > To: Bannerman, Israel > Cc: 'debian-user@lists.

RE: Star Office Installation

compare the error messages to the file names cd /usr/local/soffice mv so-5_2-ga-bin-linux-en-000.bin so-5_2-ga-bin-linux-000.bin ---^^^ etc... Bob Quoting "Bannerman, Israel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Here is the output: > > -wee:~$ ls -l /usr/local/soffice > total 42304 > -rw-

RE: Star Office Installation

alot! -Israel Bannerman -Original Message- From: Bob Thibodeau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 7:28 PM To: Bannerman, Israel Cc: 'debian-user@lists.debian.org ' Subject: Re: Star Office Installation What's the output of ls -l /usr/local/soffice ? Bob

Re: Star Office Installation

What's the output of ls -l /usr/local/soffice ? Bob On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 05:26:07PM -0500, Bannerman, Israel wrote: > > To all: > > I just downloaded Star Office and I am trying to install the application. > > Before downloading the file I did: > > mkdir -m 0755 /usr/local/soffice > chown

Re: Star Office 6

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:20:56AM -0500, Hanasaki JiJi wrote: > Where, exactly, did this text come from? It's quoted from the license agreement for Star Office 6 beta. -- Tommi Komulainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG 1024D/68388EE66FD6 DD79 EB38 BF6F 3533 09C0 0

Re: Star Office 6

Where, exactly, did this text come from? will trillich wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 08:35:51PM +0300, Tommi Komulainen wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 06:11:08AM -0700, sheine wrote: I have downloaded all the files for Star Office 6, but haven't the slightest idea of how to install them.

Re: Star Office 6

On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 08:35:51PM +0300, Tommi Komulainen wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 06:11:08AM -0700, sheine wrote: > > I have downloaded all the files for Star Office 6, but haven't the > > slightest idea of how to install them. The guide describes a method that > > relates to the CD ver

Re: Re. Star Office 6

On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 01:37:55PM -0700, sheine wrote: > Tommi Komulainen wrote: > > > Just a thought, you weren't planning to do anything productive with, or > > did you? If you did, guess you'd better reconsider: [I was referring to StarOffice there] I guess I should've added more smileys th

Re: Star Office 6

Phillip Deackes wrote: > > On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 07:12:06 -0700 > sheine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I changed the permissions and got new troubles. The soa and sop files > > started, but told me that I did not have enough disk memory, when I am > > reasonably sure that I do. The first so file

Re: Re. Star Office 6

Hello sheine, I am not sure what qualifies for serious work. I have been using StarOffice 5.2 since it came out for serious and productive work without nearly the amount of lost work as I had previously with any MS office product. It's not perfect but it is more reliable than MS products I have

Re: Re. Star Office 6

sheine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tommi Komulainen wrote: >> Just a thought, you weren't planning to do anything productive >> with, or did you? If you did, guess you'd better reconsider: > This message caused me to reconsider the several years that I have > fooled around with linux. Maybe i

Re. Star Office 6

Tommi Komulainen wrote: Just a thought, you weren't planning to do anything productive with, or did you? If you did, guess you'd better reconsider: This message caused me to reconsider the several years that I have fooled around with linux. Maybe it is just a computer game, not a serious tool

Re: Star Office 6

On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 06:11:08AM -0700, sheine wrote: > I have downloaded all the files for Star Office 6, but haven't the > slightest idea of how to install them. The guide describes a method that > relates to the CD version. All the files are of the form *.bin. Does > anybody know what to do

Re: Star Office 6

On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 07:12:06AM -0700, sheine wrote: > I changed the permissions and got new troubles. The soa and sop files > started, but told me that I did not have enough disk memory, when I am > reasonably sure that I do. The first so file told me that I needed the > directory on the las

Re: Star Office 6

On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 07:12:06 -0700 sheine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I changed the permissions and got new troubles. The soa and sop files > started, but told me that I did not have enough disk memory, when I am > reasonably sure that I do. The first so file told me that I needed the > direct

Re: Star Office 6

I changed the permissions and got new troubles. The soa and sop files started, but told me that I did not have enough disk memory, when I am reasonably sure that I do. The first so file told me that I needed the directory on the last so file. When I tried it, I was told that a bin file couldn't

Re: Star Office 6

On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 06:11:08AM -0700, sheine wrote: > I have downloaded all the files for Star Office 6, but haven't the > slightest idea of how to install them. The guide describes a method that > relates to the CD version. All the files are of the form *.bin. Does > anybody know what to do

Re: star office 5.2

On Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:53:46PM +0300, Petteri Heinonen wrote: > Hello. > I've tried to set up Star Office 5.2. I first downloaded > so-5_2-ga-bin-linux-en.bin from the Sun's website. Then I made the > downloaded file executable, and ran it as root, with option /net. Now,

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:10:40AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote: :That is a topic of much debate. In general, I fall on the "sudo is evil" :side of the fence, but the basic arguments are: :anti-sudo: It allows you to give limited root access to certain users :without requiring that they know t

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:25:23PM -0700, Mark Wagnon wrote: :I've never used sudo. Whenever I need to do something as root, I use :su. What's the difference? Is one better/more secure than the other? I find that if I use "su" for an X application I need to meddle with my display security (xhost

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:25:23PM -0700, Mark Wagnon wrote: > On 06/10/01 17:37:44 -0400, Jonathan D. Proulx wrote: > > You don't need to be root, using "sudo" is fine. If you don't know > > what sudo is, install it and read the man page then ask here, it's > > *very* useful. > > I've never used

Re: star office debian-correct installation

Mark Wagnon wrote: > Also, this installation occured on a system running woody, and I > don't have java installed so I don't have java support in SO. > -- > Mark Wagnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > AFAIR you'll only need java when you use SO as a web brower and e-mail client (I think it uses java for P

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On 06/10/01 17:37:44 -0400, Jonathan D. Proulx wrote: > On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 01:50:16PM -0700, Mark Wagnon wrote: > > :This started the installation program I put it in > :/usr/local/bin/soffice52. After the installation finished, I then > :logged in as an unpriviledged user, and ran: > : > :

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, joe golden wrote: >When I last checked Star Office was not a package in the stable >distribution. waiting is. There have been threats to package OpenOffice for some time now. It won't go into stable for quite a while after that though. >For our small school, which I am abo

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 01:50:16PM -0700, Mark Wagnon wrote: :This started the installation program I put it in :/usr/local/bin/soffice52. After the installation finished, I then :logged in as an unpriviledged user, and ran: : :$ /usr/local/bin/soffice52/program/setup AFAIR, if you run "soffi

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On 06/10/01 13:16:15 -0700, Mark Wagnon wrote: > On 06/10/01 21:47:41 +0200, Frans Schreuder wrote: > > [..] > > > But your install 'sequence' doesn't ring a bell ;-) > > ?espesially? (memory?) the 'net'-option. > > > > I have the executable. That I my knowledge ends. > > [..] Okay, just ins

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On 06/10/01 21:47:41 +0200, Frans Schreuder wrote: [..] > But your install 'sequence' doesn't ring a bell ;-) > ?espesially? (memory?) the 'net'-option. > > I have the executable. That I my knowledge ends. [..] I'm downloading it right now. It looks to be a little different from what I rememb

Re: star office debian-correct installation

--- Frans Schreuder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > oppurtunity > could you mention wich commands to follow installing > staroffice for debian? > That is that I wasnot able to find a "convention" > for installing non-debian > software. Reading dutch manual bij Bezemer. > www.dddi.nl (there is a part

Re: star office debian-correct installation

On 06/10/01 21:18:58 +0200, Frans Schreuder wrote: > oppurtunity > could you mention wich commands to follow installing staroffice for debian? > That is that I wasnot able to find a "convention" for installing non-debian > software. Reading dutch manual bij Bezemer. www.dddi.nl (there is a part in

Re: star office debian-correct installation

Schreuder - Original Message - From: "Nuhn Yobiznez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "joe golden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 9:10 PM Subject: Re: star office debian-correct installation > > --- joe golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: &g

Re: star office debian-correct installation

--- joe golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I last checked Star Office was not a package in > the stable > distribution. > > For our small school, which I am about to switch > from NT to Linux, Star > Office appears to be the answer to our need for a > bundle of stable office > programs.

Re: Star Office + Unstable

I looked at the strace-output and found many errors like this (but I can't interpret them): fstat64(0x1c,0xbfff7534) shmat(28,0x2,0x2,ptrace: umoven: Input/output error) Only a hint;-( or is this normal? -- \ __ Dieter Faulbaum

Re: Star Office + Unstable

Pierfrancesco Caci wrote: > > :-> "Rainer" == Rainer Merz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi, > > On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 10:32:44AM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote: > > >> Does anybody else has this problem? > > > yep, we are running three Sid Boxes here having exactly the >

Re: Star Office + Unstable

:-> "Rainer" == Rainer Merz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 10:32:44AM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote: >> Does anybody else has this problem? > yep, we are running three Sid Boxes here having exactly the > same problems since a couple of days. Curre

Re: Star Office + Unstable

Hi, On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 10:32:44AM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote: > Does anybody else has this problem? yep, we are running three Sid Boxes here having exactly the same problems since a couple of days. Currently trying to determine what causes this behaviour :-( Regards, Rainer

Re: "firing up" DocBook (was Re: Star Office)

On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > What LaTeX buys is the ability to create rightly formatted ASCII > output including pagination, ToC, index, etc. Sorry to come in so late on the conversation, but how is this done? I had a request to convert my resumé to text recently (I keep it as

Re: Star Office

on Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 08:51:28AM -0300, Carlos Laviola ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On 24-Mar-2001 Ethan Benson wrote: > > StarOffice is non-free and not packaged, so you will have to install > > it into /usr/local via a tarball. eventually OpenOffice will be > > packaged but i think its st

"firing up" DocBook (was Re: Star Office)

on Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 02:12:10AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sunday 25 March 2001 10:22, Ethan Benson wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:13:47PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > I've used DocBook for a couple of projects, and prefer LaTeX for > > > generalized typeset output

Re: Star Office

On Sunday 25 March 2001 10:22, Ethan Benson wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:13:47PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > What version of abiword are you using? I'm running 0.7 under > > unstable/testing, and it's definitely tolerable for light use. > > It's mostly what I pull out to do something

Re: Star Office

> I am sure, but maybe I did it too often and they blocked my IP. Thats a posibility since they dont want people to redistribute their software.. Regards Roberto Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://vivaldi.ddts.net P

Re: Star Office

On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:00:09 -0300 (BRT) Carlos Laviola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you sure? I mean, I'm downloading it right now. (big 95 mb d/l! thank god > i > have cable.) I am sure, but maybe I did it too often and they blocked my IP. -- Christoph Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ^X^C q

Re: Star Office

> > non-english speakers, as they can't download it anymore but need to > > pay +9 $ ordering the CD. Of course, they tell you so _after_ registering. > Are you sure? I mean, I'm downloading it right now. (big 95 mb d/l! thank god > i > have cable.) Yes I was about to download it yesterday. It is

Re: Star Office

On 25-Mar-2001 Christoph Simon wrote: > On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:51:28 -0300 (BRT) > Carlos Laviola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > StarOffice is non-free and not packaged, so you will have to install >> > it into /usr/local via a tarball. eventually OpenOffice will be >> > packaged but i think

Re: Star Office

On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:51:28 -0300 (BRT) Carlos Laviola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > StarOffice is non-free and not packaged, so you will have to install > > it into /usr/local via a tarball. eventually OpenOffice will be > > packaged but i think its still in a rather broken state since its > >

Re: Star Office

On 24-Mar-2001 Ethan Benson wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 10:53:41AM +, Keith O'Connell wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I need to be able to read, and compose MS compatible documents. I have >> pretty much decided that the path of least resistance for me will be >> Star Office. >> >> I cannot find it

Re: Authoring tools (was Re: Star Office)

On 24 Mar 2001, Krzys Majewski wrote: > Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > lyx requires non-free software, thats a showstopper. > > It does? Which? It requires the non-free XForms library. (but the lyx developers are working on this - see [1] for more information). > -chris cu Adria

Re: Authoring tools (was Re: Star Office)

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 09:43:15PM -0800, Krzys Majewski wrote: > Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > lyx requires non-free software, thats a showstopper. > > It does? Which? [EMAIL PROTECTED] /root]# grep non-free /etc/apt/sources.list [EMAIL PROTECTED] /root]# apt-get install lyx

Re: Authoring tools (was Re: Star Office)

Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > lyx requires non-free software, thats a showstopper. It does? Which? -chris

Re: Star Office

"Karsten M. Self" writes: > What version of abiword are you using? I'm running 0.7 under > unstable/testing, and it's definitely tolerable for light use. It's > mostly what I pull out to do something that involves short text and > hardcopy -- a letter, say. Actually, I love LaTeX for letters.

Re: Authoring tools (was Re: Star Office)

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 07:39:18PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > Probably. I've always found if I'm using nedit I keep asking myself why > I'm not using vim ;-) Though I'll sometimes pull up nedit for > cut'n'paste out of Netscape edit dialogs. yup for me i use emacs, but for this individual s

Authoring tools (was Re: Star Office)

on Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:22:06PM -0900, Ethan Benson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:13:47PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > What version of abiword are you using? I'm running 0.7 under > > unstable/testing, and it's definitely tolerable for light use. It's > > m

Re: Star Office

"Michael Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > standards. If you want WYSIWYM (What You See Is What You Mean), use LyX. LyX rocks, too bad its latex conversion is not invertible: foo.lyx -> foo.tex -> bar.lyx != foo.lyx In fact, the example I tried (some random thing I was typing) broke hope

Re: Star Office

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:13:47PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > What version of abiword are you using? I'm running 0.7 under > unstable/testing, and it's definitely tolerable for light use. It's > mostly what I pull out to do something that involves short text and > hardcopy -- a letter, sa

Re: Star Office

on Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 07:09:09PM -0500, Michael Soulier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 02:53:51PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > > > abiword is unusably buggy in potato (and helix/ximian) kword in > > the unofficial potato repository is also quite buggy (it makes most of > >

Re: Star Office

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 02:53:51PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > abiword is unusably buggy in potato (and helix/ximian) kword in > the unofficial potato repository is also quite buggy (it makes most of > the text invisible randomly when your typing). ted might be ok, i > haven't done much testing

Re: Star Office

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 03:33:54PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > StarOffice, that bloated stuck pig of an office suite, isn't packaged. > It probably offers the best compatibility with MS file formats, however. any other suggestions? abiword is unusably buggy in potato (and helix/ximian) kwo

Re: Star Office

on Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 10:53:41AM +, Keith O'Connell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hi, > > I need to be able to read, and compose MS compatible documents. I have > pretty much decided that the path of least resistance for me will be > Star Office. > > I cannot find it in the 2.2r2 distributi

Re: Star Office

> I cannot find it in the 2.2r2 distribution. Is it in there but I am too > blind to see? If not is it available in deb format somewhere, and if so > what would be the correct location to add to my "sources.list" to keep > current? I have a special Debian distribution that contains Staroffice 5.2

Re: Star Office

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 10:53:41AM +, Keith O'Connell wrote: > Hi, > > I need to be able to read, and compose MS compatible documents. I have > pretty much decided that the path of least resistance for me will be > Star Office. > > I cannot find it in the 2.2r2 distribution. Is it in there bu

Re: Star Office (OpenOffice)

S.O.=yes O.O.= Im not sure but I dont think so, but it works well with tarsetup or in german: mach einfach tar ... setup MM

Re: Star Office (OpenOffice)

> on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 09:09:22AM +0100, Max Reiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > is there somewhere a Star Office or OpenOffice deb? Should you just be concerned that installing the standard sun download would in any way break your system - that is not the case. Just download, run: xxx0.bin -n

Re: Star Office (OpenOffice)

on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 09:09:22AM +0100, Max Reiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hi > > is there somewhere a Star Office or OpenOffice deb? Not, AFAIK, yet. The usable product isn't free, the free product isn't usable. I believe it's scheduled. The OpenOffice download page only lists tarballs:

Re: Star Office 5.2 /net

If you've got the single file install just execute it with the /net option after it, its not in the documentation but it worked for me. Regards, Peter Firmstone.

Re: Star Office

On Fri, Aug 25, 2000 at 09:49:50PM +0800, Shane wrote: > Are there any other software in Debian for viewing a MS Word doc?. > I have a Debian 2.2 system. mswordview? try dpkg -l '*word*'... moritz -- /* Moritz Schulte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * http://hp9001.fh-bielefeld.de/~moritz/ *

Re: Star Office

Try "abiword". The deb package is on the debian site. The official site for this is . This is capable of reading/ writing on M$ doc format -Office97 Have not tried with more advanced M$-Word versions. Also capable of handling rtf format (both read and write). USM Bish O

Re: Star Office

>> I need to read a MS Word document. Are there >> any other software in Debian for viewing a >> MS Word doc?. I have a Debian 2.2 system. >> Thanks catdoc will transform it into text. No graphics, no structuration. Ignasi _ \

Re: Star Office

> "Shane" == Shane writes: > I need to read a MS Word document. Are there any other > software in Debian for viewing a MS Word doc?. Catdoc may help. Mike P.S. It's partner, xls2csv, is also very handy for extracting fields from excel files. > dpkg --status catdoc Package:

Re: Star Office

On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 05:42:18PM -0700, Shane wrote: > > Hi, > Is there a Debian package of the Star Office? No. The default installer works pretty well though. StarOffice is scheduled for release under GPL/LGPL October 13, 2000. I would expect that a Debian package might be available s

Re: Star Office

personally i prefer word perfect to star office... (despite corel's atrocities) its not trying to be a complete desktop, just a word processor. does .doc conversion pretty well but if all you want is to READ the doc there is an MSwordview plug-in for netscape At 05:42 PM 8/23/2000 -0700, Shane

Re: Star Office

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Brendan O'Brien wrote: > > > Hey Y'all-- > > I was wondering if anyone out there has had the same problem I have with > StarCalc. In my work I routinely do data analysis on hundreds of thousands > of data points. Normally, I use Excel on Win98 to do this but recently

Re: Star Office

Well, I did not really experience exactly the same thing, but I have well tested that StarCalc has some bugs when managing memory. The more time you work with it, the more it grows in memory. A lot to do with the UNDO routines, I'm afraid. So... you can *try reducing* the number of steps you want

Re: Star Office 5.1 dead?

I have SO 5.1 working fine with Potato, but installing it was a headache. When I was first trying, Debian potato was using a distribution of glibc that had some problems with threading, and I had problems installing because of it. A new glibc package was released a couple of days after I started tr

Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink?

I have installed and run it without a hitch on my pure slink system. Martin From: Matthew Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Ben Lutgens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: Jesse Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian user list Subject: Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink? Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1

Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink?

On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 12:06:15PM +1000, Matthew Dalton wrote: > Has anyone used Star Office 5.1 with Slink, or any other glibc2.0 based > distribution? > Star Office 5.1 was released to fix problems with SO5.01 and glibc2.1, > but is it still compatible with glibc2.0? Yes, I use it now with pl

Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink?

On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Matthew Dalton wrote: > Yes, but potato uses glibc2.1, which is what Star Office 5.1 is meant to > run with. I want to know whether Star Office 5.1 is backward compatible > with glibc2.0 (ie Slink, RH5.2 etc...). I have StarOffice 5.1 installed in Debian 2.1 (slink). I don't

Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink?

Ben Lutgens wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 11:56:07PM -0500, Jesse Jacobsen wrote: > > Matthew Dalton writes: > > > Has anyone used Star Office 5.1 with Slink, or any other glibc2.0 based > > > distribution? > > > > So, I'd also like to know if anyone has downloaded it and successfully > > i

Re: Star Office 5.1 with Slink?

On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 11:56:07PM -0500, Jesse Jacobsen wrote: > Matthew Dalton writes: > > Has anyone used Star Office 5.1 with Slink, or any other glibc2.0 based > > distribution? > > So, I'd also like to know if anyone has downloaded it and successfully > installed it. > StarOffice 5.1 ins

Re: Star Office installation

Where did you get the tar from. It sounds vaguely like you have got one part of a series of tars. The tar should be about 70Mb. Peter Allen Ming Hsu wrote: > > Finally decided to install Star Office, and didn't expect any trouble > since I already have glibc 2 and others instal

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote: > Hello, > I was the one who posted the original message for help with this. > After reading your message, I played around with the "soffice" wrapper that > calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work... > > 1) I got the libc deb from slink. > 2) I ma

Re: Star Office 5.0

I once had SO5 running fine with my S3 ViRGE/VX using the SVGA server. On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, William R Pentney wrote: > On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Robert Rati wrote: > > > Has anyone gotten Star Office 5.0 to install on Debian 2.1? Everytime I > > try to ru nthe setup program, An error message pops u

Re: Star Office 5.0

On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Robert Rati wrote: > Has anyone gotten Star Office 5.0 to install on Debian 2.1? Everytime I > try to ru nthe setup program, An error message pops up about the window > manager not setting the window size and it defaults to the default size, > then the windows start to come u

Re: Star Office 5.0

Robert Rati wrote: > > Has anyone gotten Star Office 5.0 to install on Debian 2.1? Everytime I > try to ru nthe setup program, An error message pops up about the window > manager not setting the window size and it defaults to the default size, > then the windows start to come up and X freezes. A

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

> "Rick" == Rick Cosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Rick> Hmm - that would only work if it were installed. I can't Rick> get it installed at all - Create a directory named /usr/local/slink, and get and untar the following file in there: ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/s

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

David Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 27 Mar 1999 23:14:05 +0200, wrote: > > I hope noone minds if I expand on this thread a little. Sorry, but > there's too much to quote. Summary: running up to date potato, > apparently glibc2.1 replaced glibc2.0 and staroffice stopped working. > >

Re: star office

On 31 Mar 1999, Bud Rogers wrote: > > setenv SAL_DO_NOT_USE_INVERT50 true > > I read somewhere that using that fix caused problems with other programs. > Have you seen this? None that I have seen. I also read the same thing but I have not seen any program that reacts badly to it. The other optio

Re: Star office S3 server fix

Shawn Nguyen wrote: > Hi, > > Does anyone know where I can download the S3 video server fix? I've > been > trying to look for it but didn't have any luck looking on the star office > site. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null Go to

Re: star office

On 31 Mar 1999, Bud Rogers wrote: > Daniel Mashao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 2. (The simplest) Define a variable in your start-up files eg. .tcshrc of > > .bashrc. > > > > setenv SAL_DO_NOT_USE_INVERT50 true > > > > or > > > > export SAL_DO_NOT_USE_INVERT50=true > > > > and everything

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

On Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:36:23 CST, wrote: > Hello: > Well, now that we've all got Star Office 5.0 running on the latest > cutting-edge potato systems, can anyone print from it?? When I try, I get > the following messages: > [..] > sh: /home/myuser/Office50/glibc2/libdl.so.2: no version information

Re: star office

Daniel Mashao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. Use the SVGA drivers instead of the S3 drivers for X11. > > 2. (The simplest) Define a variable in your start-up files eg. .tcshrc of > .bashrc. > > setenv SAL_DO_NOT_USE_INVERT50 true > > or > > export SAL_DO_NOT_USE_INVERT50=true > > and ever

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

Hello: Well, now that we've all got Star Office 5.0 running on the latest cutting-edge potato systems, can anyone print from it?? When I try, I get the following messages: sh: /home/myuser/Office50/glibc2/libdl.so.2: no version information available (required by sh) sh: /home/myuser/Off

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

David Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote: > > Hello, > > I was the one who posted the original message for help with this. > > After reading your message, I played around with the "soffice" wrapper that > > calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work.

RE: star office

On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Shawn Nguyen wrote: > I am using an S3 graphics card. I guess I'm out of luck huh? Thanks for > the info though even though I find it kind of strange that that would be > the case. I guess I should do some research to see if there's any kind of > fix for this problem. No

Re: star office

On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Shawn Nguyen wrote: > Hi, > > I am having some problem with Star Office 5.0, could someone shed some > light on the situation? Apparently when I try to update the mail box > Star Office start to freeze up my computer. What's happening is that my > CPU is being overloa

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote: > Hello, > I was the one who posted the original message for help with this. > After reading your message, I played around with the "soffice" wrapper that > calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work... > > 1) I got the libc deb from slink. > 2) I ma

Re: star office

On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Shawn Nguyen wrote: Good - it's not just me! I have a P5 133 w/80 MB RAM and it does the same thing. I can use it as root just fine, but when I try to use it as anyone else it works fine, but then hangs and then when I boot it up again it either (1) does nothing at all, or (2)

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

On 27 Mar 1999 23:14:05 +0200, wrote: I hope noone minds if I expand on this thread a little. Sorry, but there's too much to quote. Summary: running up to date potato, apparently glibc2.1 replaced glibc2.0 and staroffice stopped working. Jules Bean suggested a wrapper for staroffice: 1.) Get

Re: Star Office 5 & Potato/Glibc2.1??

>> "RKL" == Ryan K Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: RKL> I know that I'm probably a moron for running "up to date" potato RKL> systems. However, when potato moved to Glibc 2.1, my Star Office RKL> 5 stopped working. Is there any way to have BOTH Glibc 2.0 and RKL> 2.1, or is there some other wa

Re: Star Office 3.1 install problem

On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:59:09PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'm running the XF86_SVGA X server under Debian 2.0. > > I downloaded Staroffice31-common.tar.gz, StarOffice31-english.tar.gz and > StarOffice31-statbin.tar.gz to /usr/local. When untarred they installed > to /usr/local/StarO

Re: Star Office 3

If I remember correct, SO3 needs Motif libs for the setup programm. Version 4 and 5 don't. HTH Ramin "Jeff Browning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hey all, > > I just got Star Office 3. My ISP automatically disconnects me after four > hours even if I'm not idle. Anyway, when I try to r

  1   2   >