I am using SuSE 7.3 and still learning basics at the beginning of a move of a small home/office network from M$ NT4 / 2K to Linux (or at least as far as I can go). I have used Star Office 5.1, 5.2, and 6 beta as well as Open Office on Windows NT, but have not as yet stated using applications in a Linux environment. That will come but I am still learning and playing around. One significant problem we have is that my wife receives a lot of word processing documents and occasional spreadsheet files, and the odd presentation file from members of an organisation in which she has an executive role. These files invariably originate from an M$ Office version from 95 to XP. In most cases she has success with reading them in SO5.2 and then edits, or creates documents and saves them in M$ Office 97 format to send out. Her recipients often have difficulty in reading these files. Has anyone suggestions on the best way of dealing with this problem? Which software would do the best job, presently under M$ NT4, but subsequently under Linux? My preference is not to have to run M$Office...! All advice appreciated. Also thanks to all the list contributors, I have already found a lot of valuable information on the list. John John Blue, PO Box 542 Mawson ACT 2607 Australia email: jblue@bestpond.com Fax: +61 2 6291 1119 Thought for the day: Daddy, what does FORMATTING DRIVE C mean?.
On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 00:54, John Blue wrote:
I am using SuSE 7.3 and still learning basics (...)
My preference is not to have to run M$Office...!
Hi John, Maybe you should have a look at http://www.openoffice.org , they got both a Windoze and a Linux version for dl... Cheers .... Wolfi ============================================= mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote:
On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 00:54, John Blue wrote:
I am using SuSE 7.3 and still learning basics (...)
My preference is not to have to run M$Office...!
Hi John,
Maybe you should have a look at http://www.openoffice.org , they got both a Windoze and a Linux version for dl...
That doesn't solve the problem, if people are always checking the document for evidence that it has been on a non-Microsoft word processor. You need an exact copy of the software which will be used at the other end. When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who started Lindows. -- Tim Prince
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote:
On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 00:54, John Blue wrote:
Maybe you should have a look at http://www.openoffice.org , they got both a Windoze and a Linux version for dl...
That doesn't solve the problem, if people are always checking the document for evidence that it has been on a non-Microsoft word processor. You need an exact copy of the software which will be used at the other end. When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly? Paul
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote: When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly?
If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with." Actually, I feel strongly enough about standards compiance on the internet, that I wouldn't even submit my resume to a company that requests it in any proprietary format. Rick Green
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Rick Green wrote: rg> On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote: rg> rg> > On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote: rg> > > On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote: rg> > > When I rg> > > was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly rg> > > both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to rg> > > which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had rg> > > been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who rg> > > started Lindows. rg> > rg> > I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a rg> > document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits rg> > correctly? rg> > rg> If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a rg> non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my rg> time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with." rg> Actually, I feel strongly enough about standards compiance on the rg> internet, that I wouldn't even submit my resume to a company that rg> requests it in any proprietary format. rg> I know this is starting to go off topic from the original intent of the post. But, why would anyone send a resume in word format in the first place? Wouldn't PDF be better? No matter what computer they open it with, the format/layout will be the way YOU (not YaST online update) intended it to be. rg> Rick Green rg> rg> rg> -- S.Toms - smotrs at mindspring.com - www.mindspring.com/~smotrs SuSE Linux v7.3+ - Kernel 2.4.10-4GB
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote: When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same
Let's send it to the list this time... :-} I wish Mozilla understood mailing lists. Rick Green wrote: people who
started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly?
If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with."
Unfortunately it's not that simple. It's often not the employers that insist on Word format resumes, but the intermediate agencies - specifically, I've noticed, they want it that way so they can doctor it before it reaches the employers. (Mainly to lose your contact information - they want to make the employers go through the agency of course - but I've noticed other alterations when I've been in interview.) I author my CV in LyX and produce LaTeX, plaintext, HTML, PDF and Word (via SO6); then when I send it off, I tend to send the HTML version, plus the Word version if to an agency, with a link to the page where all the versions reside. -- Rachel
On Saturday 30 March 2002 08:57, Rick Green wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 03:18, wolfi wrote: When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly?
If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with." Actually, I feel strongly enough about standards compiance on the internet, that I wouldn't even submit my resume to a company that requests it in any proprietary format.
Rick Green If I had been so hard nosed, I wouldn't be employed now. I'm fortunate enough to have an employer who considers the linux side of their business indispensable, second to the Windows business, but clearly a requirement for international markets. A corollary is the position "linux will never amount to anything on the desktop." No matter that SuSE, and the rest of the world, get along fine without making such a distinction between server and desktop.
-- Tim Prince
On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 17:57, Rick Green wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected that it had been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same people who started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly?
If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with." Actually, I feel strongly enough about standards compiance on the internet, that I wouldn't even submit my resume to a company that requests it in any proprietary format.
Rick Green
This reminds on something else ... Our data security guys at work (*) say, that we should only send out (externally) pdf files, and no .doc, .xls or whatever. For several reasons: One of them is, you can see previous 'versions' since there is an undo history, so maybe (in your case if you send an application), they can find out to whom you already sent this earlier. The next one is, that there are dozens of versions of excel, win-word and so on- you never can assure compatibility even with your business partners [one of them (American) even told me, that they don't have so many M$ licenses, I (me, myself) gave them a StarOffice CD then...]. I don't know if this is relevant for anyone of you, but if the situation is as described, I would recommend pdf (mostly to be done by 'print to pdf' in Linux, or 'print to ps file' and doing ps2pdf afterwards) Cheers ... Wolfi ============================================= mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com (*) work = Siemens, in my case, as some of you already know:-) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
On Saturday 30 March 2002 09:43 am, Tim Prince wrote:
When I was out of work recently, I made certain that my resume displayed correctly both on Word 97 and on WordPerfect linux. Even one of the linux shops to which I applied rejected it, on the grounds that they detected
been on a non-Microsoft word processor. Those must be the same
Hmm, this is a good idea wolfi - except when your business partner must make changes, and this happens a lot, at least in my line of work. What's funny, is there for awhile, where I worked, they blocked all compressed files as well as the usually list of .bat, .exe, etc files. I was helping with a major data conversion and we were sending lots of source back and forth, well you know - that company mandated 2 mb file size limit got to us after awhile. As far as seeing previous versions, that usually only happens when you enable the "track changes" functionality in M$ Office. Otherwise, you can load up an old document from a year ago, and select undo and expect it to undo the last change in that doc. (Least I can't do that.. and believe me, I've tried in the past :))) Glen Goldsmith -----Original Message----- From: wolfi [mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 4:38 AM To: SLE-list Subject: Re: [SLE] Sending documents 'outside', was: Reading & Writing M$Office (..) On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 17:57, Rick Green wrote: that it had people who
started Lindows.
I'm curious -- why would anyone (other than a Microsoft employee) care if a document has been on a non-MS processor as long as it prints and edits correctly?
If someone rejected my resume because it had been prepared using a non-windows word processor, I would say "Thank you for not wasting my time. You're obviously not someone I want to work with." Actually, I feel strongly enough about standards compiance on the internet, that I wouldn't even submit my resume to a company that requests it in any proprietary format.
Rick Green
This reminds on something else ... Our data security guys at work (*) say, that we should only send out (externally) pdf files, and no .doc, .xls or whatever. For several reasons: One of them is, you can see previous 'versions' since there is an undo history, so maybe (in your case if you send an application), they can find out to whom you already sent this earlier. The next one is, that there are dozens of versions of excel, win-word and so on- you never can assure compatibility even with your business partners [one of them (American) even told me, that they don't have so many M$ licenses, I (me, myself) gave them a StarOffice CD then...]. I don't know if this is relevant for anyone of you, but if the situation is as described, I would recommend pdf (mostly to be done by 'print to pdf' in Linux, or 'print to ps file' and doing ps2pdf afterwards) Cheers ... Wolfi ============================================= mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com (*) work = Siemens, in my case, as some of you already know:-) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
On Sun, 2002-03-31 at 12:52, Glen Goldsmith wrote:
Hmm, this is a good idea wolfi - except when your business partner must make changes, and this happens a lot, at least in my line of work.
Yes, you're right of course, I'm only doing some project status reports and nobody is supposed to change anything no matter how much I blamed him for failing to do his duties in this document:-) You _can_ select text and pictures out of a pdf file with the text selection tool in the acroreader, but that unluckily only seems to work with pdfs from Adobe Distiller, not with those I get from the 'print to pdf' command in the File menu of e.g. kword. This pdf appears to be nothing but pixel, or at least it's totally scrambled. I tried to copy&paste back from the 'print.pdf' file to a kword file -> only wierd characters.
What's funny, is there for awhile, where I worked, they blocked all compressed files as well as the usually list of .bat, .exe, etc files.
FYI these files are often viruses harming less sophisticated OSes:-) (..)
As far as seeing previous versions, that usually only happens when you enable the "track changes" functionality in M$ Office. Otherwise, you can load up an old document from a year ago, and select undo and expect it to undo the last change in that doc. (Least I can't do that.. and believe me, I've tried in the past :)))
Well, I haven't, I was just following what I was told to do when sending data outside:-)
Glen Goldsmith
Cheers ... Wolfi ============================================= mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
wolfi wrote:
You _can_ select text and pictures out of a pdf file with the text selection tool in the acroreader, but that unluckily only seems to work with pdfs from Adobe Distiller, not with those I get from the 'print to pdf' command in the File menu of e.g. kword. This pdf appears to be nothing but pixel, or at least it's totally scrambled. I tried to copy&paste back from the 'print.pdf' file to a kword file -> only wierd characters.
I saw the explanation for this in man ps2pdf: (SuSE 7.1) The one current great shortcoming of ps2pdf is that except for the fourteen built-in PDF fonts, it converts all fonts in the PostScript file to bitmap fonts in the PDF file, and scrambles the character codes so that the output is not searchable. (Normally it produces 720dpi bitmaps, but you can change this using Ghostscript's -r option.) We intend to mostly fix this by the end of 1998. SH
On Monday 01 April 2002 00:15, wolfi wrote:
You _can_ select text and pictures out of a pdf file with the text selection tool in the acroreader, but that unluckily only seems to work with pdfs from Adobe Distiller, not with those I get from the 'print to pdf' command in the File menu of e.g. kword.
It works for me using SO print to ps and then ps2pdf (not nearly as convenient as KDE print to pdf of course) and then viewing with xpdf. What your seeing could either be a font problem or to do with the configuration options for the pdf creation in KDE. Jethro
Hi Wolfi, Thanks for the reply. I have tried OO on Windows and am looking at 741d on Windows, looks like it will do the job OK. I hope to be able to try it on Linux once I am confident my system is running OK. John
============================================= mailto:wolfi_z@yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
John Blue, PO Box 542 Mawson ACT 2607 Australia email: jblue@bestpond.com Fax: +61 2 6291 1119 Thought for the day: Concerto (n): a fight between a piano and a pianist.
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 16:54, John Blue wrote:
I am using SuSE 7.3 and still learning basics at the beginning of a move of a small home/office network from M$ NT4 / 2K to Linux (or at least as far as I can go).
I have used Star Office 5.1, 5.2, and 6 beta as well as Open Office on Windows NT, but have not as yet stated using applications in a Linux environment. That will come but I am still learning and playing around.
One significant problem we have is that my wife receives a lot of word processing documents and occasional spreadsheet files, and the odd presentation file from members of an organisation in which she has an executive role. These files invariably originate from an M$ Office version from 95 to XP.
In most cases she has success with reading them in SO5.2 and then edits, or creates documents and saves them in M$ Office 97 format to send out.
Her recipients often have difficulty in reading these files.
Has anyone suggestions on the best way of dealing with this problem? Which software would do the best job, presently under M$ NT4, but subsequently under Linux? My preference is not to have to run M$Office...!
All advice appreciated.
snipped
It is too late to suggest that you try the StarOffice 6 beta, as StarOffice 6 will be generally unavailable for the next couple of months. However OpenOffice is available and works as well as StarOffice. With the latest OO 641D some of the differences that were visible between SO 6 and OO 6xx appear to have disappeared. You can set OO or SO to automatically save your files as MS Office formats. You do not have to specifically import or convert MS files into OO/SO, you just open the MS files directly into OO/SO, seamlessly. My day job plus my startup company make extensive use of MS files. My employer and customers send files in MS format and expect to receive everything back in MS format. The new OO/SO does an excellent job of handling these MS files such that no one even questions how the files have been handled. With Word and Excel files the transfer success is probably 95 to 98%. The 2 to 5% failure in exchanging files is not a small piece of several files but rather one or two problems files that do not import or export well. This failure rate is low enough that MS users expect it, as transferring files from Word95 to Word97 to Word2000 to WordXP will produce similar if not higher failure rates. I have had 2 page simple Word documents that would not transfer well and have also had 45 page word documents with automated Table of Contents, embedded pictures, multiple sections with differing headers and footers plus text with coloured backgrounds that were imported perfectly. My experience is that MS powerpoint files (4 to 19 MB) are successfully transferred OO/SO about 85 to 90% of the time. The real business ppt and pps seem to be transferred fine and it is mostly the joke ones that do not open up correctly in OO/SO. Perhaps it is the extra animations in the joke pps that cause the problem. I encourage you to try OO 641D (www.openoffice.org). The linux binary download is around 65 MB (openoffice does not include a database or java) and the installation is very simple. Spend about 1/2 hour setting up the options and defaults and MS Office is not needed. With OO/SO you do not need to try and convince the world around you to abandon their MS Office and to send all files to you in RTF or non-proprietary formats, which is not going to happen. -- Ralph Sanford - If your government does not trust you, rsanford@telusplanet.net - should you trust your government? DH/DSS Key - 0x7A1BEA01
My experience is that MS powerpoint files (4 to 19 MB) are successfully transferred OO/SO about 85 to 90% of the time. The real business ppt and pps seem to be transferred fine and it is mostly the joke ones that do not open up correctly in OO/SO. Perhaps it is the extra animations in the joke pps that cause the problem.
The problem with StarOffice/OpenOffice and Powerpoint files is that it will do things like convert what was an editable graph object into a static image, even if you save it back out as a Powerpoint file. Of course it doesn't support the more advanced animation effects of Powerpoint 2002 either. But, on the other hand, I know for a fact that StarOffice/OpenOffice will open some corrupt Powerpoint documents that Powerpoint itself will choke on and refuse to open. (Usually 75-120meg files with corrupt images, etc will choke in Powerpoint but not in StarOffice). I know this since I've used it a number of times to recover customer's files in my job. Too bad it doesn't open Publisher files, that would be useful. <sigh> Needless to say, my employer frowns on this method, but they already frown at me for my Userfriendly.org cartoons and my various Linux T-shirts and "Tux" security badge holder. So one more thing to make them frown doesn't matter much. Though the article I wrote on how to use it for this purpose has dissapeared from our knowlege base mysteriously... :) MattB (I'm not saying who I work for, but the company name starts with an M and ends with a T.)
Matt Beazer schrieb: Hi Matt,
My experience is that MS powerpoint files (4 to 19 MB) are successfully transferred OO/SO about 85 to 90% of the time. The real business ppt and pps seem to be transferred fine and it is mostly the joke ones that do not open up correctly in OO/SO. Perhaps it is the extra animations in the joke pps that cause the problem.
The problem with StarOffice/OpenOffice and Powerpoint files is that it will do things like convert what was an editable graph object into a static image, even if you save it back out as a Powerpoint file. Of course it doesn't support the more advanced animation effects of Powerpoint 2002 either.
I thought more it converts program *objects* like a Excel Graph into a grapic object, a collection of squares, rectangles, lines and text that look like a graph.
But, on the other hand, I know for a fact that StarOffice/OpenOffice will open some corrupt Powerpoint documents that Powerpoint itself will choke on and refuse to open. (Usually 75-120meg files with corrupt images, etc will choke in Powerpoint but not in StarOffice). I know this since I've used it a number of times to recover customer's files in my job. Too bad it doesn't open Publisher files, that would be useful. <sigh>
I did the same with some corrupted word documents that only existed as a corrupted mail attachment. Much fun, the power of the penguin.
Needless to say, my employer frowns on this method, but they already frown at me for my Userfriendly.org cartoons and my various Linux T-shirts and "Tux" security badge holder. So one more thing to make them frown doesn't matter much. Though the article I wrote on how to use it for this purpose has dissapeared from our knowlege base mysteriously... :) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is this your sompany's equivalent for the Suse Support DB??
MattB (I'm not saying who I work for, but the company name starts with an M and ends with a T.)
That PS sends a shiver down my spine... ;-) Juergen
-- =========================================== __ _ Juergen Braukmann juergen.braukmann@gmx.de| -o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Tel: 0201-743648 dk4jb@db0qs.#nrw.deu.eu | /\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / ===========================================_\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
On Fri, 2002-03-29 at 16:54, John Blue wrote:
I am using SuSE 7.3 and still learning basics at the beginning of a move of a small home/office network from M$ NT4 / 2K to Linux (or at least as far as I can go).
I have used Star Office 5.1, 5.2, and 6 beta as well as Open Office on Windows NT, but have not as yet stated using applications in a Linux environment. That will come but I am still learning and playing around.
One significant problem we have is that my wife receives a lot of word processing documents and occasional spreadsheet files, and the odd presentation file from members of an organisation in which she has an executive role. These files invariably originate from an M$ Office version from 95 to XP.
In most cases she has success with reading them in SO5.2 and then edits, or creates documents and saves them in M$ Office 97 format to send out.
Her recipients often have difficulty in reading these files.
Has anyone suggestions on the best way of dealing with this problem? Which software would do the best job, presently under M$ NT4, but subsequently under Linux? My preference is not to have to run M$Office...!
All advice appreciated.
snipped
It is too late to suggest that you try the StarOffice 6 beta, as StarOffice 6 will be generally unavailable for the next couple of months.
However OpenOffice is available and works as well as StarOffice. With the latest OO 641D some of the differences that were visible between SO 6 and OO 6xx appear to have disappeared.
You can set OO or SO to automatically save your files as MS Office formats. You do not have to specifically import or convert MS files into OO/SO, you just open the MS files directly into OO/SO, seamlessly.
My day job plus my startup company make extensive use of MS files. My employer and customers send files in MS format and expect to receive everything back in MS format. The new OO/SO does an excellent job of handling these MS files such that no one even questions how the files have been handled. With Word and Excel files the transfer success is probably 95 to 98%. The 2 to 5% failure in exchanging files is not a small piece of several files but rather one or two problems files that do not import or export well. This failure rate is low enough that MS users expect it, as transferring files from Word95 to Word97 to Word2000 to WordXP will produce similar if not higher failure rates. I have had 2 page simple Word documents that would not transfer well and have also had 45 page word documents with automated Table of Contents, embedded pictures, multiple sections with differing headers and footers plus text with coloured backgrounds that were imported perfectly.
My experience is that MS powerpoint files (4 to 19 MB) are successfully transferred OO/SO about 85 to 90% of the time. The real business ppt and pps seem to be transferred fine and it is mostly the joke ones that do not open up correctly in OO/SO. Perhaps it is the extra animations in the joke pps that cause the problem.
I encourage you to try OO 641D (www.openoffice.org). The linux binary download is around 65 MB (openoffice does not include a database or java) and the installation is very simple. Spend about 1/2 hour setting up the options and defaults and MS Office is not needed. With OO/SO you do not need to try and convince the world around you to abandon their MS Office and to send all files to you in RTF or non-proprietary formats, which is not going to happen.
Hi Ralph, Your detailed response is very much appreciated. I have downloaded the windows version of 641d and we will try it out, using some of the files that had caused problems recently. Once I have the linux system running OK I will download the Linux versions and see how we go.
Best wishes, John
-- Ralph Sanford - If your government does not trust you, rsanford@telusplanet.net - should you trust your government?
DH/DSS Key - 0x7A1BEA01
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
John Blue, PO Box 542 Mawson ACT 2607 Australia email: jblue@bestpond.com Fax: +61 2 6291 1119 Thought for the day: Intuition (n): an uncanny sixth sense which tells people that they are right, whether they are or not.
participants (13)
-
Glen Goldsmith -
Jethro Cramp -
John Blue -
Juergen Braukmann -
Matt Beazer -
Paul W. Abrahams -
Rachel Greenham -
Ralph Sanford -
Rick Green -
S.Toms -
Sjoerd Hiemstra -
Tim Prince -
wolfi