Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

[James Hogarth]

On 6 February 2013 12:33, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 02/06/2013 02:36 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> About the "soffice" alias, it still breaks parallel installation in F18
>> (just tried, the desktop integration from OpenOffice conflicts with
>> libreoffice-core). It seems that the upstream LibreOffice packages no
>> longer use the "soffice" alias (at least, the desktop integration only
>> installs "libreoffice3.6"),
>>
>
> Yeah, looks like <http://cgit.freedesktop.org/**
> libreoffice/core/commit/?id=**b1cf810a8e7342ad5d518528fd5826**6daf6e90ec<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=b1cf810a8e7342ad5d518528fd58266daf6e90ec>>
> "LibreOffice branding: make desktop integration work (fix2)" dropped the
> /usr/bin/soffice symlink from the upstream LO packages, for reasons that
> escape me---maybe it was just ignorance or an oversight.
>
>
>
Whether it was dropped upstream or not (you sure on current LO not having
that?) we're talking about Fedora's packaging here and the implication on
the changes of behaviour to Fedora users...

Just checked my system:

 [me at system ~]$ which soffice
/usr/bin/soffice
[me at system ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/bin/soffice
libreoffice-core-3.6.3.2-8.fc18.x86_64

That commit date was back in 2010 and this was a fresh F18 install and not
an upgrade as well...

I just grabbed the SRPM for 4.0 from rawhide as well to check and the spec
file includes %{_bindir}/soffice

So there's an expectation of compatibility that exists right now - Stephen
what's your thoughts on this going forwards?

As for the 'true owner' of oowriter and so on - well both AOO and LO can be
considered forks of the original oo.org at this point given their histories
and LO is already present...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130206/fba439d9/attachment.html>