Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Dec 2006 18:35 UTC, submitted by Patrik Buckau
Features, Office "OpenOffice.org 2.1 is recommend for all users, as it represents a significant improvement over all previous versions. Among other things: multiple monitor support for Impress; improved Calc HTML export; enhanced Access support for Base; even more languages; automatic notification of updates."
Thread beginning with comment 191687
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: As RPMs
by cyclops on Wed 13th Dec 2006 12:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: As RPMs"
cyclops
Member since:
2006-03-12

Skipping the "!?" and moving to the content.

"OOo is a general Linux software and is meant to be distro independent. So they should also use a distro independent packaging."

Why? A distribution is just that not a single program, but a collection of many programs. Many of those programs have dependancies. I'll pick one Java.

"We've had enough of that patching shit with distros like RedHat and Mandrake and the result was that nothing would compile or install on those distros."

I've *never* used those distributions. I cannot comment how they have been patched, but I suspect that those distributions are simply not designed for you to compile stuff yourself, and really if they are any good, you really shouldn't have to. I suspect though you are overstating your case, or your preferance for Slackware.

"I prefer the official files from OOo rather then trusting packages compiled by someone else."

If you don't trust the person you got the distribution from seriously, why did you install it.

"Sun can do it for their Java, Adobe for Flash and Mozilla for their apps so why not OOo?"

And those applications are poor at installing; long live GPL Java, Gnash, and Iceweasel.

Edited 2006-12-13 12:59

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: As RPMs
by WorknMan on Wed 13th Dec 2006 18:20 in reply to "RE[6]: As RPMs"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

"OOo is a general Linux software and is meant to be distro independent. So they should also use a distro independent packaging."

Why? A distribution is just that not a single program, but a collection of many programs. Many of those programs have dependancies. I'll pick one Java.


So a distro is just a collection of many programs, fine. But what if I want to install something that my distro hasn't provided for me? Do I then have to resort to voodoo/sacrificing live chickens, or worse yet, try to find a distro that has the exact combination of programs I want? Either that, or start harassing my current distro vendor to package some app I want to try out, which will probably be done by volunteers who don't get paid.
Look, I'm a power user, and it's not unusual for me to try out 10-15 different flavors of the same kind of app. When I get in one of these kinds of moods to experiment, I need the apps to be available to me. This whole thing of 'distro will provide' is tedious, annoying, and needs to be rethought.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: As RPMs
by cyclops on Wed 13th Dec 2006 19:19 in reply to "RE[7]: As RPMs"
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"Look, I'm a power user" -If your a power user you should be able to roll your own RPMs's. I can't see as it being that difficult.

"It's not unusual for me to try out 10-15 different flavors of the same kind of app" - I suspect thats easier under linux than anything else.

...I suspect very strongly that your not a power user.

Edited 2006-12-13 19:21

Reply Parent Score: 1