Subject: Re: OpenOffice 2
To: Steven M. Bellovin <>
From: Phil Nelson <>
List: pkgsrc-users
Date: 08/29/2006 23:20:25
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tuesday 29 August 2006 23:07, you wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:55:42 -0700, Phil Nelson <> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 29 August 2006 22:20, you wrote:
> > > /usr/pkg/emul/linux/lib/ is part of suse_base-10.0nb2.
> > > openoffice2-bin requires suse_compat, which in turn -- at least for 1=
> > > which is what I use -- requires suse_base. =A0In other words, it *sho=
uld* be
> > > there for you....
> >=20
> > Ok, I see the problem. =A0The above looks like /lib/ but
> > openoffice is looking for /usr/lib/ =A0It appears that
> > openoffice should have added a symbolic link in /usr/lib. =A0=20
> >=20
> That sounds wrong -- if anything should add it, it should be suse_base.
> But I suspect that it's looking first in /lib and then in /usr/lib. =A0=20

Yes, suse_base may need to be the one.  The installation was on a fresh
install of 3.1RC1 and the installation didn't work.  I added the symbolic
links I mentioned above and soffice worked great.  So I doubt that soffice
is looking at /lib first or it would have found

I'm not sure which package is at fault, but the result was not good.


Phil Nelson                       NetBSD:
e-mail:           Coda:

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)