[CentOS] OpenOffice.org 1.1.2 vs. 2.0.2

[Jim Perrin]

> I know that stock rpm's from openoffice.org *can* be installed, but I think it
> would be a pity to ruin the otherwise great artwork consistency (I have to
> seduce the new Linux users, remember).
>
> The latest Fedora 5 came out, and I see that there's a source rpm available at
> rpm.pbone.net. Unfortunately, I'm on dialup here, and there's no chance I can
> get this until next week. Plus, I'm only a beginner with source RPM's, and OO
> is somewhat of a bear to compile. Now what if one of the gurus here gave it a
> shot? Got some bandwidth and some CPU to spare? Or maybe evaluate my chances as
> to the outcome? Or is it better to tell the Windows people to default to .sxw
> and stick with the present version (which, I must say, looks quite bug-free)?

Rebuilding the OOo 2.x rpms from fedora require significant rebuilding
of several other packages as well, and what you end up with is closer
to fedora than centos. Because of the major package upgrades required,
we decided against a rebuild. The official openoffice rpms from
openoffice.org work perfectly, and install right beside the current
centos 1.x rpms. The 2.x rpms will import the centos/rhel settings and
'just work' if you install all the rpms (there's one in another folder
that people forget when they unpack the tarball).

-- 
This message has been double ROT13 encoded for security. Anyone other
than the intended recipient attempting to decode this message will be
in violation of the DMCA