Niltze- On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Hagar Delest <hagar.del...@laposte.net> wrote: > Le 19/04/2014 01:53, Kay Schenk a écrit : > >> Ok, maybe the subject is bit melodramatic but after some of the twisted >> things we read about, basically how non-supportive either AOO is of >> Linux, >> or Linux is non-supportive of AOO, here's what I'm thinking. >> >> 1) We do a blog whose main subject is AOO and Linux and interview some of >> our Linux volunteers/users (hopefully a nice dstro cross section -- >> Fedora, Ubuntu. openSUSE, Mint?) and ask them why they're using AOO and >> how >> did they find the installation given that it isn't available in their >> existing repositories. >> >> -- or -- >> >> 2) We do a Linux centered blog on what support we provide for Linux, what >> Linux packages AOO provides wtih additional distribution details, and why >> they're not in repositories for distributions. On the latter point, I'm >> thinking talk about whose job this is, etc. >> >> I think we really should do something a bit more visible on this topic, >> and >> hopefully some of the open source press can pick it up. >> >> Thoughts? >> > IMHO, most users just take what's provided by default. Unless it is too > buggy. > So I think that basically, we are back to the question: why AOO is still not > available in the standard packages? > > As long as it is not easily available, users won't bother removing another > application to install AOO. Especially if it involves command line (to > install but also sometimes to remove the default suite). [..]
On an initial Debian installation, if GNOME is selected, it will install LO by default. Accordingly the burden falls on the user to remove LO: $ sudo su $ apt-get purge libreoffice-base-core libreoffice-common libreoffice-core libreoffice-draw libreoffice-gnome libreoffice-gtk libreoffice-impress libreoffice-java-common libreoffice-math libreoffice-writer Note, however that, once downloaded, it is not intuitive for a relatively novice (i.e., Ubuntu user) to install ApacheOO since after expanding its *.tar.gz file, there appears a directory: en-US (or whatever the locale selected). The user then must become root (super user) or prefix su to install at /opt/ privileged directory: $ sudo su $ dpkg -i en-US/DEBS/*deb AND then still there is no link for the the user with normal privileges to start up ApacheOO from the normal PATH directory /usr/bin/. And thus root privilege is required again to create the appropriate symlink there; the most simple one (I think) and that would not be overwritten by an subsequent (accidental installation of LO) would be: $ sudo su $ cd /usr/bin $ ln -s /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice apacheeoo $ cd /opt/openoffice4/program/soffice $ ln -s soffice.bin apacheoo.bin The above just creates a symbolic link required due to our use of apacheoo instead of the default soffice/soffice.bin that is used by LO as well. Now the Ubuntu user would have to create executable icons for the ApacheeOO productivity apps to match the default LO that is now removed. On the other hand, those of us who don't care simply start ApacheOO from a shell as a normal user now: $ apacheoo & Is it obvious now -- as MS did before by preinstalling its own constrained software and denying users the freedom of choice -- why ApacheOO may be lacking traction on GNU/Linux? Best Professional Regards. -- Jose R R http://www.metztli-it.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEW Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1! Download for GNU/Linux, Mac OS, Windows. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Daylight Saving Time in USA & Canada ends: Sunday, November 02, 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
