openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

broch · 2007-03-31 04:10:36

Hi,
Openoffice 2.2 was just released. I am wondering if there any plans to upgrade oo.org in Arch repositories (version 2.0.4)
There are some improvements that I am interested (e.g. multimedia embedding in the Impress module, better projector integration, improved speed), should I wait for repositories update or get new version from openoffice site?

Thank you.

Stalwart · 2007-03-31 08:32:11

For arch64 it's in repositories for few weeks already

broch · 2007-03-31 16:23:45

interesting, no update for 32-bit even though this is 32-bit software (including 64-bit repos).

TheGrudge · 2007-04-02 12:26:59

I upgraded OO today and Impress isn't working anymore. If you start a slideshow, it goes into fullscreen mode and immediately kills the application. Hmm...

btw. I like the new archlinux splashscreen... ;-)

berbae · 2007-04-02 12:48:33

When I launch '/opt/openoffice/program/soffice -writer' I get these messages :

(process:6576): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: gtype.c:2242: initialization assertion failed, use IA__g_type_init() prior to this function
(process:6576): Gdk-CRITICAL **: gdk_screen_get_font_options: assertion `GDK_IS_SCREEN (screen)' failed

many times.
It doesn't seem to crash though, but I didn't use it much at this time.
So I'm not sure if it works or not, but I don't like these messages.

broch · 2007-04-02 13:09:06

well I updated oo.org from Aur (which took 3 hrs to compile). Impress lost Insert -> Multimedia
menu. It seems that this is not related to the sources Arch is using, but directly to oo.org as I have seen people complaining about this issue on oo.org forum (ubuntu). However some distros seem to be more lusky as they do have menu option for multimedia embeding (fedora). Probably then, this is related to the time point when sources were picked up (devel is older than release).

Aside from this, oo.org seems faster, there is an option to configure presentation for a projector but dimmed. Not sure yet if this requires something else to be activated or this is a problem with devel release.

Weeks · 2007-04-02 17:50:19

2.2.0 appears on the RSS feed of recent packages and in /var/abs/extra/office when I run 'abs' but not when I run pacman -Syu. Is that normal?

tlaloc · 2007-04-02 18:27:36

Yeah - as far as I know, the mirrors sync only once a day. So there may be a time-lag of 24 hours, depending on your preferred servers. 2.2.0 installation just worked fine here (Central Europe), btw - thanks to the packagers! Should work for for everyone tomorrow.

Last edited by tlaloc (2007-04-02 19:28:50)

cougar · 2007-04-02 19:14:52

I've got a problem with spellchecking. It's not working anymore !

tlaloc · 2007-04-02 19:28:08

I cannot reproduce that problem in German/English/Spanish. Any details?

berbae · 2007-04-02 19:40:59

Hi tlaloc
Can you tell please if you get the error messages I mentioned above when you run in a console :
/opt/openoffice/program/soffice -writer

I have the OOo 2.2.0 i686 version installed on a up to date system.

Thanks you for answering.

qlus · 2007-04-02 20:29:15

I also had problem with spellchecking. OOo coudln't find something in /opt/openoffice/share/dict/ooo.
I've removed all OOo packages, removed /opt/openoffice and installed OOo back. Works fine now.

Last edited by qlus (2007-04-02 20:30:36)

cougar · 2007-04-02 21:31:59

tlaloc wrote:

I cannot reproduce that problem in German/English/Spanish. Any details?

I've just fixed it by doing like qlus. I am using "openoffice-spell-fr".

Bogart · 2007-04-03 00:52:18

Yes, the spell checking problem is solved by reinstalling openoffice-spell-xx.

Anyway, I thought that the main advantage of having a native openoffice instead of the official build was startup speed (the rest seem disadvantages: problems, bugs, difficult to maintain,...). However, this last build is much slower for me. 2.0.4 took 10 seconds to start the first time, then about 3 or 4. This one takes 15 secs the first time and 15 subsequent times. It looks like it has some problem. Does anyone else have this problem?

I'll downgrade to 2.0.4, but I wonder if there are any plans for continuing offering an official build.

tlaloc · 2007-04-03 07:32:03

berbae wrote:

Hi tlaloc
Can you tell please if you get the error messages I mentioned above when you run in a console :
/opt/openoffice/program/soffice -writer

I don't get any error message (using 2.2.0-3). Things just work fine for me out-of the-box. Nor is it slower than previous versions.

ise · 2007-04-03 08:32:57

The same here on my arch64 box, no problems... Everything works just fine. It starts faster than the 2.0.4 release.

berbae · 2007-04-03 13:28:08

Whatever I launch from OOo 2.2.0-3 i686 (32bit architecture) I get :

(process:6701): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: gtype.c:2242: initialization assertion failed, use IA__g_type_init() prior to this function
(process:6701): Gdk-CRITICAL **: gdk_screen_get_font_options: assertion `GDK_IS_SCREEN (screen)' failed

These messages are repeated many times at start-up and during run time of the applications

My installation is pretty standard, I can't think of something special on my machine.

Can someone on a 32bit arch machine tell if OOo 2.2.0 works without error messages on his machine ?
The messages appear in the ~/.xsession-errors file or on the screen if the appli was launched in a console.

I'm disappointed now by these messages. Thanks for helping me.

Last edited by berbae (2007-04-03 13:37:40)

Weeks · 2007-04-03 15:13:28

tlaloc wrote:

Yeah - as far as I know, the mirrors sync only once a day. So there may be a time-lag of 24 hours, depending on your preferred servers. 2.2.0 installation just worked fine here (Central Europe), btw - thanks to the packagers! Should work for for everyone tomorrow.

It seems it's over a day - I had to change my extra's mirror to ftp.archlinux.org.

I can't find the icon for openoffice now though. There's one in /usr/share/icons/* but not the nice openoffice one I had before.

Bogart · 2007-04-03 15:17:04

berbae wrote:

Whatever I launch from OOo 2.2.0-3 i686 (32bit architecture) I get :
(process:6701): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: gtype.c:2242: initialization assertion failed, use IA__g_type_init() prior to this function
(process:6701): Gdk-CRITICAL **: gdk_screen_get_font_options: assertion `GDK_IS_SCREEN (screen)' failed

I reinstalled and now the speed problem is gone. It starts up just the same as 2.0.4.

However, I do get those same error messages if I open it from a terminal. I'm not sure how important they are, since I didn't test the application much yet.

Weeks · 2007-04-03 15:41:42

It works fine here. I'm using a 32bit machine.

ralvez · 2007-04-03 16:03:59

@berbae: I do get the same "collection of errors" as you do if I run the program from the terminal.
If I start from the GUI I do not see any errors, but most importantly, the program works fine regardless of how I start it.

I'm not sure it is a critical error, although the messages suggest is is.

R

tlaloc · 2007-04-03 18:00:27

32bit, fairly standard installation, running fine, nothing in ~/.xsession-errors.
Sorry if I cannot be much of a help here ...

berbae · 2007-04-03 20:24:20

Thank you Bogart and ralvez
For I know now that I'm not the only one to get those messages.

If I start from the GUI I do not see any errors

But in this case the error messages are printed in the ~/.xsession-errors file.

I googled about these messages and here is what I conclude at this time :
These messages are classical gtk error messages
Nobody's given a clear explanation, apart from looking for an error in the programs, about missing gtk initialization
or a program compiled with a gnome/gtk version and running with another newer version.

I wonder if the openoffice-base 2.2.0-3 package was built with the gnome 2.18 packages or with the right gtk package, or ....

But seemly there is a problem with the package and/or its depends and makedepends packages (I'm not sure).

It is often proposed as a solution to install the binaries from the Openoffice site, but I don't like that idea because the Arch devs have optimized the package and I would like to keep the better result from them.

Sadly I'm afraid that my machine is not powerful enough to recompile OOo myself.
So I hope that the package maintainers will look and check what is wrong in the OOo build process, at least the i686 version.

And I don't understand why tlaloc and Weeks don't encounter the same problem ??

Can I ask to them what gtk theme, if any, they use on their machine or do they use the gtk-qt engine for KDE?
It would be nice if they could give us that info, thanks.

Edit : I don't think the problem is related to the gtk theme or the gtk-qt-engine for KDE because I made some tests with that matter and nothing changes with error messages in OOo. I stay stumped at this stage because the OOo windows and menus are qt like rather than gtk like for appearance and fonts, so I don't understand at all the error messages ?? I persist to think there may be a problem with the package build process.

Edit2 : Even if these messages are like false alarm red lights, they are very annoying and disturbing.
If I may do that, I invite everybody to say if they encounter other problems using OOo 2.2.0 apart from these messages. It's to confirm the 'false alarm' hypotheses.
I will also test the 'vanilla' binaries from Openoffice.org directly. Thanks for contributing.

Last edited by berbae (2007-04-04 12:38:05)

berbae · 2007-04-04 15:07:13

I've found a way to get rid of the annoying gtk related error messages when running OOo under KDE :
I added this line in ~/.bashrc file :

export OOO_FORCE_DESKTOP=gnome

I installed the gtk-qt-engine package and configure it like that :
KDE Control Center/Appearance & Themes/GTK Styles and Fonts

GTK Styles
Use another style (which I can pick from the choices at the right)
GTK Fonts
Use my KDE fonts in GTK applications

The choice 'Use my KDE style in GTK applications' doesn't work for me.
The choice 'Use another font' works and allows to change the menus fonts of OOo.

To be sure everything is set correctly :
End current session
Login again

After that the error messages are gone when I launch the Openoffice suite.

I can now use the Arch optimized Openoffice 2.2.0 suite with a much quieter mind

Last edited by berbae (2007-04-04 15:33:05)

Bogart · 2007-04-05 08:29:48

I myself downgraded to 2.0.4 because 2.2 didn't feel right. Opening a .ppt file was painfully slow as compared to 2.0.4, for example.

So for me, it seems like the official binaries work much better. Must be just me, though.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-03-31 04:10:36

openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#2 2007-03-31 08:32:11

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#3 2007-03-31 16:23:45

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#4 2007-04-02 12:26:59

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#5 2007-04-02 12:48:33

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#6 2007-04-02 13:09:06

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#7 2007-04-02 17:50:19

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#8 2007-04-02 18:27:36

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#9 2007-04-02 19:14:52

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#10 2007-04-02 19:28:08

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#11 2007-04-02 19:40:59

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#12 2007-04-02 20:29:15

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#13 2007-04-02 21:31:59

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#14 2007-04-03 00:52:18

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#15 2007-04-03 07:32:03

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#16 2007-04-03 08:32:57

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#17 2007-04-03 13:28:08

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#18 2007-04-03 15:13:28

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#19 2007-04-03 15:17:04

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#20 2007-04-03 15:41:42

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#21 2007-04-03 16:03:59

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#22 2007-04-03 18:00:27

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#23 2007-04-03 20:24:20

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#24 2007-04-04 15:07:13

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

#25 2007-04-05 08:29:48

Re: openoffice 2.2 upgrade?

Board footer