Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Gentoo User (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-user/)
-   -   libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ? (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-user/634615-libreoffice-bin-3-4-5-2-broken.html)

Jacques Montier 02-18-2012 08:39 AM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Hi all,

I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
I get "instruction not permitted".
So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.

Any idea ?

Thank you,

Cheers,

--
Jacques

Nilesh Govindrajan 02-18-2012 11:41 AM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Jacques Montier <jmontier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
> I get "instruction not permitted".
> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>
> Any idea ?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Jacques
>

It didn't work for me as well :|
I ended up compiling libreoffice-3.5 (took about 4h).

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Neil Bothwick 02-18-2012 11:54 AM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:

> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
> I get "instruction not permitted".
> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.

It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.

Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)


--
Neil Bothwick

Your lack of organisation does not represent an
emergency in my world.

Nilesh Govindrajan 02-18-2012 12:01 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>
>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
>> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>
> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>
> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
> can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> Your lack of organisation does not represent an
> emergency in my world.

Well, I don't have an i7. I'm on a Dual Core 2 Ghz E2180. Yes really that old.

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Jacques Montier 02-18-2012 12:43 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Le 18/02/2012 13:54, Neil Bothwick a écrit :
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>
>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
>> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>
> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
> can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>
>

Before ie7, i had an 10 year-old PC, and it was 5 or 6 hours compiling
Openoffice...
Let's try now...;-)

Thanks,

Cheers,

--
Jacques

Dale 02-18-2012 12:51 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Jacques Montier wrote:
> Le 18/02/2012 13:54, Neil Bothwick a écrit :
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>>
>>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
>>> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>>
>> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
>> can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>>
>>
>
> Before ie7, i had an 10 year-old PC, and it was 5 or 6 hours compiling
> Openoffice...
> Let's try now...;-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Jacques
>

Chew on this one. This is for my old rig:

Thu Dec 22 06:27:17 2011 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.3.2-r1
merge time: 18 hours, 46 minutes and 20 seconds.

I just love updating that old thing. lol

Dale

:-) :-)


--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or
how you interpreted my words!

Miss the compile output? Hint:
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"

Jacques Montier 02-18-2012 01:05 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Le 18/02/2012 14:51, Dale a écrit :
> Jacques Montier wrote:
>> Le 18/02/2012 13:54, Neil Bothwick a écrit :
>>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>>>
>>>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
>>>> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>>>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>>>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>>> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>>>
>>> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
>>> can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> Before ie7, i had an 10 year-old PC, and it was 5 or 6 hours compiling
>> Openoffice...
>> Let's try now...;-)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> --
>> Jacques
>>
> Chew on this one. This is for my old rig:
>
> Thu Dec 22 06:27:17 2011 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.3.2-r1
> merge time: 18 hours, 46 minutes and 20 seconds.
>
> I just love updating that old thing. lol
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>
>
Yes,

It was worth changing a use flag then :-)

--
Jacques

Dale 02-18-2012 01:21 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Jacques Montier wrote:
> Le 18/02/2012 14:51, Dale a écrit :
>> Jacques Montier wrote:
>>> Le 18/02/2012 13:54, Neil Bothwick a écrit :
>>>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage, but it
>>>>> does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>>>>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>>>>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>>>> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>>>>
>>>> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if you
>>>> can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Before ie7, i had an 10 year-old PC, and it was 5 or 6 hours compiling
>>> Openoffice...
>>> Let's try now...;-)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jacques
>>>
>> Chew on this one. This is for my old rig:
>>
>> Thu Dec 22 06:27:17 2011 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.3.2-r1
>> merge time: 18 hours, 46 minutes and 20 seconds.
>>
>> I just love updating that old thing. lol
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-) :-)
>>
>>
> Yes,
>
> It was worth changing a use flag then :-)
>
> --
> Jacques
>

Funny thing is, I updated that a week or so ago. It took 3 tries to get
LOo to compile and finish. Is it just me or do they always seem to fail
right at the end? ROLF

Dale

:-) :-)


--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or
how you interpreted my words!

Miss the compile output? Hint:
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"

Alan McKinnon 02-18-2012 01:42 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:54:14 +0000
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>
> > I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage,
> > but it does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
> > I get "instruction not permitted".
> > So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>
> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>
> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if
> you can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>
>

Like this?

# cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 42
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2720QM CPU @ 2.20GHz

# genlop -t libreoffice
* app-office/libreoffice

Sun Jan 15 20:27:12 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.99.3
merge time: 50 minutes and 42 seconds.

Thu Jan 19 01:28:48 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.1
merge time: 58 minutes and 38 seconds.

Fri Feb 17 10:21:57 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
merge time: 50 minutes and 8 seconds.
--
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Jacques Montier 02-18-2012 02:17 PM

libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 broken ?
 
Le 18/02/2012 15:42, Alan McKinnon a écrit :
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:54:14 +0000
> Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:39:32 +0100, Jacques Montier wrote:
>>
>>> I upgraded to libreoffice-bin-3.4.5.2 which is stable in portage,
>>> but it does'nt work on intel ie7 amd64.
>>> I get "instruction not permitted".
>>> So i masked 3.4.5.2 and downgraded to 3.3.4.
>> It seems like it was compiled using CFLAGS unsuitable for an i7.
>>
>> Why not use the source package? What's the point of having an i7 if
>> you can't brag about compiling LO in well under an hour? ;-)
>>
>>
> Like this?
>
> # cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel
> cpu family : 6
> model : 42
> model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2720QM CPU @ 2.20GHz
>
> # genlop -t libreoffice
> * app-office/libreoffice
>
> Sun Jan 15 20:27:12 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.99.3
> merge time: 50 minutes and 42 seconds.
>
> Thu Jan 19 01:28:48 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.1
> merge time: 58 minutes and 38 seconds.
>
> Fri Feb 17 10:21:57 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.5.0.3
> merge time: 50 minutes and 8 seconds.

Here it is...


processor : 7
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 26
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz
stepping : 5
microcode : 0xf
cpu MHz : 3067.000
cache size : 8192 KB

genlop -t app-office/libreoffice

Sat Feb 18 16:10:44 2012 >>> app-office/libreoffice-3.4.5.2
merge time: 1 hour, 22 minutes and 35 seconds.


And it works fine !
Neil, it was a very good idea ! :-)

Thanks,

--
Jacques


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:22 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.