Problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD
stephen at math.missouri.edu
Tue Jan 1 12:21:45 PST 2008
Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> Philipp Ost wrote:
>> O. Hartmann wrote:
>>> Whenever I try to save a document in OO writer, OO gets stuck and I
>>> have to kill it. The document gets saved, but I never can load it
>>> again without rendering OO unusuable. Opening M$ Word docs or OO docs
>>> doesn't matter.
>> I have similar problems with OpenOffice 2.3.1 on FreeBSD/i386 (I'm
>> running 7.0-PRE as of Dec 23). It's possible to save documents but
>> exiting OOo hangs and I need to kill it. Firing up OOo once again,
>> there's this "recovery stuff" which hangs also and eats up CPU time.
>> Only way out: kill -9 $PID
>> Opening a document via 'File -> Open -> ...' hangs also. .odt or .doc
>> doesn't matter.
>>> Any ideas? This is a serious situation to me, due to the need of a
>>> properly working OO :-(
>> No, perhaps using an other word processor (AbiWord, StarOffice). Or
>> going back to OOo 2.3.0...
>> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
>> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> I am not an OpenOffice user but my 2c about the topic as the problem I
> think underline more serous issue.
> The question is why is OpenOffice 2.3.1 included in the ports three so
> quickly without making sure that things work properly.
> BSD systems are genuinely known for their stability and code correctness
> which is why most people decided to use them on the first place.
> Rushing to include new software in the ports three without proper
> testing is seriously going to damage usability of the whole OS.
> In my understanding ports tree is supporting stable and the current
> brunch. I am of the opinion that the ports three of the stable
> branch should not include nothing but the rock solid and tested
> software. The easiest way for me to check if the port is bleeding
> edge that is to try to install the same software using binaries.
> (pkg_add -r) If the binaries do not exist or if the version installed
> from binaries is older that clearly indicates that the port version is
> too new to be trusted.
> I personally found out that Xfce4-panel is not compiling properly on
> stable and also Orage (calendar for Xfce) While
> problems with Xfce4-panel are not as serious as with Orage (which is
> not usable in any shape or form on FreeBSD) they are still serious.
> The same packages work flawlessly on the OpenBSD.
The problem is that ports is maintained by volunteers who are mostly
outside of any kind of freebsd core team. I think it is unrealistic to
ask port committers to check anything more than to check that the ports
My personal wish list is that opencascade builds on FreeBSD-7 with the
new stlport, and that octave-forge not be in its current "IGNORE" state.
But I fully appreciate that I must either wait, or help make it happen.
More information about the freebsd-ports