Plan for OpenOffice 2.0.3

[Gene Heskett]

Patrick wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 12:15 +0200, Henry Ritzlmayr wrote:
>> Am Montag, den 03.07.2006, 11:59 +0200 schrieb Ambrogio:
>>> Il giorno lun, 03/07/2006 alle 11.34 +0200, Henry Ritzlmayr ha scritto:
>>>> Why don´t you use the RPMs provided by openoffice.org?
>>>> RPMs for Fedora are ripped on certain functionality (IP isues). 
>>>> I am using the upstream RPMs for a while - and they work like a charm.
>>> I don't understand.
>>> I'm already using OpenOffice from openoffice.org (2.0.1 adn 2.0.2), but
>>> everytime yum tell me that openoffice should be upgraded.
>> I agree on this one - this is the only drawback here. 
>>
>>> This is why I ask about availability of OpenOffice 2.0.3 from fedora
>>> repos.
>>>
>>> But what apropos the issues (IP issues?!?!?!)
>> This has been discussed several times here and on many other places.
>> Even on bug-reports. 
>>
>> Short version: openoffice.org uses some code where redhat thinks that
>> this code might be a violation on some others IP - so they remove the
>> code (or parts of it). I have never seen or heard about a statement
>> where they explain in detail how and why they think it is that way. But
>> this is not a big problem - there are other RPMs out there
>> (openoffice.org).
> 
> Since my google query voodoo didn't turn up anything, can you please
> shed some light on which code or functionality has been removed from the
> FC OO.org rpms compared to the ones form the OO.org website.
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> Patrick
> 
In my case, I just installed the 2.0.3 from openoffice.org, and now 
yumex wants to downgrade it to 2.0.2.  Thats not at all nice IMO.

-- 
Cheers, Gene