Bug 239855 – openoffice.org-core didn't install on f7t4 install but rest of ooo did

Bug 239855 - openoffice.org-core didn't install on f7t4 install but rest of ooo did

Summary:	openoffice.org-core didn't install on f7t4 install but rest of ooo did

Status:	CLOSED WORKSFORME

Aliases:	None

Product:	Fedora
Classification:	Fedora
Component:	openoffice.org (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	rawhide
Hardware:	x86_64 Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Caolan McNamara
QA Contact:
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2007-05-11 14:43 EDT by Tim Reilly
Modified:	2007-11-30 17:12 EST (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2007-05-12 06:52:15 EDT
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Tim Reilly 2007-05-11 14:43:32 EDT

Description of problem:
open office writer wasn't launching for me. After some help I found out that
openoffice.org-core wasn't installed at all! Installing the package fixed the
problem. The error was mentioned in install.log.

The error lines in install.log
Installing openoffice.org-core - 1:2.2.0-14.6.x86_64
error: unpacking of archive failed on file /usr/lib64/openoffice.org/program/
libsvt680lx.so;46390571: cpio: read

This is on a centrino core duo, which I think is sometimes reported as ia32e,
but I use the x86_64 installer...

Comment 1 Caolan McNamara 2007-05-12 06:52:15 EDT

rpm --erasing OOo on my x86_64 and yum -y install openoffice.org-writer.x86_64
pulls down the 1:2.2.0-14.6.x86_64 writer and core rpms and installs them
without problem. I can only assume that there was some corruption of the rpms
installed in #1 or a temporary lack of space during install :-(

Comment 2 Tim Reilly 2007-05-15 14:01:53 EDT

Fair enough, I guess it could be some corruption but I'm certain it wasn't a
space issue.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.