Hi,
I am having openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1 on my system but two executables openoffice.org-1.9 & openoffice.org-2.0 in /usr/bin
Well, I wanted to know the reason for two versions in same package. Could anyone clarify this?
Regards!
On 06/11/05, Vikram Goyal vikigoyal@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am having openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1 on my system but two executables openoffice.org-1.9 & openoffice.org-2.0 in /usr/bin
Well, I wanted to know the reason for two versions in same package. Could anyone clarify this?
Regards!
Which rpms do they both belong to? Did you install both using Fedora's rpms or what?
-----Original Message----- From: Vijay Gill vijay.s.gill@gmail.com Sent: Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 10:20:34AM +0000 To For users of Fedora Core releases Subject: Re: Executables of two versions in one package
On 06/11/05, Vikram Goyal vikigoyal@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am having openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1 on my system but two executables openoffice.org-1.9 & openoffice.org-2.0 in /usr/bin
Well, I wanted to know the reason for two versions in same package. Could anyone clarify this?
Regards!
Which rpms do they both belong to? Did you install both using Fedora's rpms or what?
rpm -qp /usr/bin/openoffice.org-1.9
Name : openoffice.org-core Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.0.0 Vendor: Red Hat, Inc. Release : 3.2.1 Build Date: Fri 21 Oct 2005 02:52:24 AM IST Install Date: Tue 25 Oct 2005 07:21:35 AM IST Build Host: bugs.build.redhat.com
rpm -qp /usr/bin/openoffice.org-1.9
Name : openoffice.org-core Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.0.0 Vendor: Red Hat, Inc. Release : 3.2.1 Build Date: Fri 21 Oct 2005 02:52:24 AM IST Install Date: Tue 25 Oct 2005 07:21:35 AM IST Build Host: bugs.build.redhat.com
It seems it might have been there because of beta version (1.9) has been out for a long time and some scripts/programs might be depending on 1.9 binary to start OpenOffice.
If you look into these two files(they are just scripts), they start the same binary.
So nothing to panic about.
-----Original Message----- From: Vijay Gill vijay.s.gill@gmail.com Sent: Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 01:23:21PM +0000 To For users of Fedora Core releases Subject: Re: Executables of two versions in one package
If you look into these two files(they are just scripts), they start the same binary.
So nothing to panic about.
I had seen that but I think that in the final binary there might be a diff set of instructions for diff ver. As 1.9 gets executed from the applications menu by default, I was wondering if its just a simple wrapper for old menu scripts compatibility or some diff set of instructions in the binary itself.
Thanks!
I had seen that but I think that in the final binary there might be a diff set of instructions for diff ver. As 1.9 gets executed from the applications menu by default, I was wondering if its just a simple wrapper for old menu scripts compatibility or some diff set of instructions in the binary itself.
What do you mean by different set of instructions? Of course the final binary would be different from the beta copies (because of all the bug-fixes gone into it), but that has nothing to do with your problem. As you have seen it yourself, the 1.9 version (and 2.0 version also) is nothing but a wrapper to call the same binary, and is there for compatibility's sake. Stop worrying about this matter.
-----Original Message----- From: Vijay Gill vijay.s.gill@gmail.com Sent: Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 12:32:19PM +0000 To For users of Fedora Core releases Subject: Re: Executables of two versions in one package
I had seen that but I think that in the final binary there might be a diff set of instructions for diff ver. As 1.9 gets executed from the applications menu by default, I was wondering if its just a simple wrapper for old menu scripts compatibility or some diff set of instructions in the binary itself.
What do you mean by different set of instructions? Of course the final binary would be different from the beta copies (because of all the bug-fixes gone into it), but that has nothing to do with your problem. As you have seen it yourself, the 1.9 version (and 2.0 version also) is nothing but a wrapper to call the same binary, and is there for compatibility's sake. Stop worrying about this matter.
What I mean by diff set of instructions is that, when a binary is executed , it sometimes is checked how it has been called and as per needs the code is forked or not. Best example I can give is vim and vimdiff which are nothing but same binaries but called differently and therefore internally executed differently.
I am not worrying about anything, what caught my attention was a number of mails on the list complaining about oo carshing and also no way a guy could add a certificate to sign a document, so I went on a check myself. At that moment I found this and became curious.
Anyways, don't bother yourself.
The case of vim and vimdiff is different. That way the application is able to know the way it has been called(in c/c++ you can use argv[0] to do that), but in the case of openoffice, the binary is called in the same way and no special parameters are passed to it.
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 10:20 +0000, Vijay Gill wrote:
On 06/11/05, Vikram Goyal vikigoyal@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am having openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1 on my system but two executables openoffice.org-1.9 & openoffice.org-2.0 in /usr/bin
Well, I wanted to know the reason for two versions in same package. Could anyone clarify this?
Regards!
Which rpms do they both belong to? Did you install both using Fedora's rpms or what?
I just installed (updated from 1.9.5 to 2.0.0) OO 2.0. I have the same 2 executables, Both came from the same package.
[jeff@eagle]$ rpm -q --whatprovides /usr/bin/openoffice.org-1.9 openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1 [jeff@eagle]$ rpm -q --whatprovides /usr/bin/openoffice.org-2.0 openoffice.org-core-2.0.0-3.2.1