Ubuntu uses deb packages.

Its better to remove the "old" stuff

Bazza wrote:

...
I just don't see any sort of major revision / ease of use / security issues resolved that justifies chewing away on my limited user space
...

The major thing that did it for me was comments.  OO.o 3 does it properly now, and it's an important feature to me.  Otherwise, I think I would have been happy with 2.4 for a bit longer.

R.
==

Bazza wrote:

I've got OO 3 installed on my WinOs home machine (overwriting my 2.4) and while its lovely to look at, I can't honestly see the point of installing OO 3 on my Linux Eee within the user partition, disabling the original 2.0

I just don't see any sort of major revision / ease of use / security issues resolved that justifies chewing away on my limited user space - and the idea of doing a unionfs just to properly install with overwriting the original version seems a lot like overkill to me.

As a WP / database / spreadsheet program (of which most users likely use - maybe - 20% of all capabilities) what exactly are we gaining by installing OO 3 on the Eee?

How much bigger is 3.0 comparing to 2.4 exactly? or 2.0

lzzhang10 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

I've got OO 3 installed on my WinOs home machine (overwriting my 2.4) and while its lovely to look at, I can't honestly see the point of installing OO 3 on my Linux Eee within the user partition, disabling the original 2.0

I just don't see any sort of major revision / ease of use / security issues resolved that justifies chewing away on my limited user space - and the idea of doing a unionfs just to properly install with overwriting the original version seems a lot like overkill to me.

As a WP / database / spreadsheet program (of which most users likely use - maybe - 20% of all capabilities) what exactly are we gaining by installing OO 3 on the Eee?

How much bigger is 3.0 comparing to 2.4 exactly? or 2.0

Well, according to this -

http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/sour … qs_30.html

- OO 3 will require 400 MBs of space on Linux. This might change somewhat - depending on your install (if the Linux version has that option) as that my WinOS install is 330 MBs (when the site above suggests 440 MBs), but I only installed Writer, Calc and Base - and I already had the included version of Java installed.

Still, it seems to me a honking big program (10% of entire 4 GB SSD) to largely repeat - notwithstanding rickh's use of 'Comments', as above - a program that already exists on one's device.

kgha wrote:

One option (if for instance OOo3 has learnt how to handle the .docx format) is to install it on a SD which leaves the internal SSD unscatched. I'm contemplating this myself, but will first install OOo3 on a win pc and see how big/important the difference is.

That is the only reason I'm install it too. It would be great if I can install this on a SD card. let me know once you do it.

Some one should post a walkthrough on how to install ooo3 after downloading the deb package.

Up and running

I eventually decided to take the easy route and just install on the SSD even if it takes some extra space (since the original OOo2 won't be physically removed, just hidden). After all I've more than 9GB left and I'm not among them that store music and movies on their pc. So I followed this wiki guide, didn't fiddle with the unionfs or anything, just went straight to the "Doing the stuff" heading:

http://wiki.eeeuser.com/howto:ooo2.3

(EDIT: corrected URL)

After downloading the program - OOo_3.0.0_LinuxIntel_install_en-US_deb.tar.gz (I got it from ftp.sunet.se/pub/Office/OpenOffice.org ) I first installed after the wiki but discovered that an extra step was necessary, so I had to remove the installed files (using Synaptic) and start all over again. What has to be done is to first install something called ooobasis3.0 that comes with the package. So the first install command should be

sudo dpkg -i ooobasis*

Having done this, continue with

sudo dpkg -i openoffice*

I then added new symlinks as per the wiki and fiddled a bit with my interface. I'm running easymode and was reminded that on the 900 the simpleui.rc file is not located in the /opt/xandros/share/AsusLauncher/ folder but in /var/lib/AsusLauncher (learnt that one earlier but forgotten it).

Let the dreaded .docx files arrive

EDIT: Then I discovered that I had to adjust file associations otherwise I couldn't open OO files from File Manger (Linux is wonderful ) Solution: right-click a .doc file in File Manager, choose "Edit File Type", click (highlight) OpenOffice.org Writer (that should be seen in the "Application Preference Order" dialog box). Choose "edit" and "application". In the "command" box, browse for /opt/openoffice3/program/swriter, choose it and click OK.

Last edited by kgha (2008-11-24 10:09:02 am)

kgha wrote:

I then added new symlinks as per the wiki and fiddled a bit with my interface. I'm running easymode and was reminded that on the 900 the simpleui.rc file is not located in the /opt/xandros/share/AsusLauncher/ folder but in /var/lib/AsusLauncher (learnt that one earlier but forgotten it).

I have followed your instructions and OpenOffice 3.0 seem to work fine, but I have to start it from the terminal with soffice. I have followed the instructions in the wiki on adding symlinks and editing the simpleui.rc file (in /var/lib/AsusLauncher) but as I followed the wiki, this file was not backed up before the installation. Now I have no icons referring til Open Office in my GUI.

There were errors in the symlinks for swriter, scalc and simpress that made the links point to "file not found". When the symlinks were corrected, the ikons showed up. The problem had nothing to do with the simpleui.rc.