From owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 26 23:06:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593A616A4B3 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.185]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443F94400E for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:06:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from RoKlein@roklein.de) Received: from [212.227.126.162] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1A38EJ-0003qb-00 for openoffice@freebsd.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:06:55 +0200 Received: from [80.129.44.93] (helo=z105-e.intern.studentenwohnheim-rhein-main.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1A38EJ-0000CA-00 for openoffice@freebsd.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:06:55 +0200 From: Robert Klein Organization: roklein.de To: openoffice@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:07:24 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <3F74F010.8000403@barryp.org> In-Reply-To: <3F74F010.8000403@barryp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309270807.24991.RoKlein@roklein.de> Subject: Re: OO 1.1RC5 & FreeBSD 5.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: RoKlein@roklein.de List-Id: Porting OpenOffice to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 06:06:57 -0000 Hi, Barry: On Samstag, 27. September 2003 04:04, Barry Pederson wrote: > I found one minor glitch (was also in 1.1rc4), on FreeBSD 5.1 > running openoffice-1.1 after doing a pkg_add gives this error: > --------- > ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found > Abort trap > > As a workaround, I tried setting up a symlink: > ln -s /usr/libexec /libexec In an answer to a similar post from me (regarding RC4 on 5.1-RELEASE) Martin (Blapp) wrote: "Thats because it was compiled on 5.1 CURRENT. It will just work right on 5.2." So that probably changed in current. I set up the same symlink and I'm still happy (with RC4). I guess we 5.1ers will have to live with that.... :) Regards, Robert