[CentOS] Open Office 1.9.x

[Mark Jarvis]

I downloaded smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm. Since I didn't find any 
installation notes, etc. on the site, I tried

	rpm -ivh --test smart-0.36-19.e14.at.ie86.rpm

for a pre-install check. I got a bunch of errors, missing dependencies, 
etc. Obviously, I'm missing something.

Suggestions anyone??

-mj-

Mark Jarvis wrote:
> 
> I like it! I like it!
> 
> -mj-
> 
> Ajay wrote:
> 
>> Faced the cross-dependency problem when trying to install 1.9.113 on
>> CentOS4-i386.
>>
>> After fooling around for sometime I downloaded and installed "smart"  
>> tool from
>> http://smartpm.org. Then dumped freedesktop and redhat menu RPMS from 
>> "desktop
>> integration" folder to "RPMS" folder and ran "smart install *". That 
>> did the
>> job nicely
>>
>> Rgds
>>
>> Ajay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Quoting Mark Jarvis <mark.jarvis at pvmail.maricopa.edu>:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I have the -104 download tucked away in my download directory--I'll take
>>> a look at it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the tip!
>>>
>>> -mj-
>>>
>>> Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 22:36 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I immediately ran into problems--
>>>>>     1) The installation instructions were for OO 1.x.
>>>>>     2) The download appears to be source RPMs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I downloaded the version 1.9.104 (May 20th) binary RPMs for i386.
>>>> Build system on the RPMs is reported as up-smb2.germany.sun.com.
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm runing these binaries on Fedora Core 3 x86-64 no less.
>>>> It's a stock x86-64 install, except I do manually swap out Firefox
>>>> x86-64 for Firefox i386 (so all my i386 plug-ins work).
>>>>
>>>> So I'd say if a "plain Jane" Fedora Core 3 install (with limited Fedora
>>>> Extras / RPM.Livna.ORG packages) work, I don't see why it won't on
>>>> CentOS 4.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone added OO1.9.113 to CentOS?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would assume anything that runs on Fedora Core 3 would run on 
>>>> CentOS 4
>>>> without issue.  CentOS 3 might be an issue though.
>>>>
>>>> As far as the source RPMs, maybe those are included because you need to
>>>> build it from source.  It could be a Java Runtime Engine (JRE)
>>>> requirement that might be taken out of newer builds in favor of a GPL
>>>> Java stack like GCJ.  I'm running Sun JRE 1.5.0_02 (i586 I believe) on
>>>> my x86-64 system.
>>>>
>>>> But the RPMs didn't list them as a dependency.  In fact, I want to say
>>>> it was actually installed with the RPMs.  Now thinking back, it might
>>>> have installed Java with the RPMs in a single ".sh" file download and
>>>> subsequent run.
>>>>
>>>> That might explain it the best, why I had no problems.
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CentOS mailing list
>>> CentOS at centos.org
>>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS at centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>