Re: OpenOffice 2

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb%cs.columbia.edu@localhost>]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:20:25 -0700, Phil Nelson <phil%cs.wwu.edu@localhost> 
wrote:

> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 23:07, you wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:55:42 -0700, Phil Nelson <phil%cs.wwu.edu@localhost> 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tuesday 29 August 2006 22:20, you wrote:
> > > > /usr/pkg/emul/linux/lib/libpthread.so.0 is part of suse_base-10.0nb2.
> > > > openoffice2-bin requires suse_compat, which in turn -- at least for 
> > > > 10.0,
> > > > which is what I use -- requires suse_base.  In other words, it *should* 
> > > > be
> > > > there for you....
> > > 
> > > Ok, I see the problem.  The above looks like /lib/libpthread.so.0 but
> > > openoffice is looking for /usr/lib/libpthread.so.0.  It appears that
> > > openoffice should have added a symbolic link in /usr/lib.   
> > > 
> > 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.   
> 
> 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 libpthread.so.0.
> 
> I'm not sure which package is at fault, but the result was not good.
> 
Very strange.  Which suse version are you using?  (For the record, I do
not have any such symbolic links; my emulated libpthread is in emulated /
only.)


                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb