Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 46333
Native Linux install package using autopackage
Last modified: 2015-08-15 09:52:30 UTC
The latest version of OOo now (OOo 2.0 Beta) provides a native install package for Windows platform (using .msi file). For Linux, OOo officialy provided a RPM package. This issue proposes OOo to have a Linux install package which using an Autopackage framework. Autopackage's direct target is end-user. It provides easy-to-use GUI installer and uninstaller (in the same fashion as Windows's "Add/Remove Program"). It also resolve dependencies automatically, download required softwares/libraries from the net and install them on the fly. I believe that Autopackage will give a better experience for OpenOffice.org users. Major Linux applications that now successfully use Autopackage are including Gaim, Inkscape and AbiWord. Autopackage FAQ http://autopackage.org/faq.html
Projects using Autopackage http://navi.cx/~mike/autopackage-pdb/
for a quick view, Autopackage review at OSNews.com (2 pages) http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=10155
reassigned
I signed up just to vote for this issue, an autopackage for openoffice would be a great idea. I've been tracking the windows OOo testing builds for quite some time now, simply because they are easy to install. If I knew that there was an autopackage of OOo avaliable, I would have downloaded and tested it. I've used autopackage before to install inkscape, and eveything seemed to work really well.
To echo the general concensus of people who commented on the bug, I feel that a .package would be a good idea; I know that the huge mass of setup files with two executables in 1.x is daunting, and the RPMs with 2.0 have the "Will this work on my distro" feeling that you get when installing RPMs which aren't built with your system in mind. I also know that the autopackage people would be willing to help with making a specfile, so it wouldn't be a completely unsupported project.
A demo of a typical install session of an autopackage (use Flash) http://autopackage.org/flash-demo-install.html
This would also serve as a great flag bearer for autopackage!
Hi there, if it is not too troublesome, please help us release OpenOffice.org in the autopackage format. Thank you!
Please make an autopackage available - on Ubuntu I had to convert these packages using Alien. Linux (and OOo for Linux) will get nowhere if you got to be a nerd and use the terminal to install software. Supporting a project like AutoPackage.org is vital for Linux.
I would have very much liked to beta test for OO2 on Linux too, but due to the current way my distro, and just about every other one out there works...there was no way for me to install it except compiling it from source. An autopackage would have fixed that very nicely. I use autopackages whenever I can to promote cross-distro installation instead of distro/repository lock in. Gaim and Inkscape work flawlessly on both my Ubuntu and Gentoo machines ;) Can't wait to get a hold of OO2!
autopackage is the one tool that will make Linux shine on the desktop. That's a goal we have in common. autopackage levels one of the last advantages Windows presently has over Linux (that almost all apps work on almost all OS versions). Just imagine just preparing one autopackage and that's it. No more users having to wait until OOo comes out as an rpm for their trusty old SuSE 8.0 etc. or until it's added to their standard repository. It really can be this easy! Thx!
I have created a new section in the OpenOffice.org Wiki called "Autopackage distribution". From what I gathered in the OOo2 package dependency metadata stored in the RPM / DEB packages, it won't be an easy undertaking. However, I agree the benefit will eventually outweigh the hardwork. So please contribute thru the Wiki and provide any information which can help achieving the goal of providing OOo in autopackage format: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Autopackage_distribution
I have voted for this, although I was perfectly happy with the old installer and have voted for 44102 as well. What I am not happy with is the decision to ship multiple separate rpms. RPMs are not universally accepted - Ubuntu, for example, does not use them. The old installer worked perfectly well on every Linux varient I tried it on. I have no doubt that autopackage would be perfectly good too. Frankly, using either would be better than what we have now. I would warn the autopackage enthusiasts that there are sound technical reasons to be concerned about it, mainly involving library version proliferation. But the package itself, properly used, deals with that.
Autopackage died out years ago. Is there an alternative nowdays?
Limba: http://people.freedesktop.org/~mak/limba/