Another Fedora gripe ...

[Paul King]

On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 11:03 -0400, Kevin Cozens wrote:
> pking123-rieW9WUcm8FFJ04o6PK0Fg at public.gmane.org wrote:
> > The OOo that came with this distro is OOo "2.0 beta" which after some
> > digging turns out to be version 1.9.x (I think it was 1.9.8). So you likely
> > have a later version.
> 
> My version of Open Office was installed from the FC repositories. I don't 
> remember when 2.0 (non-beta) became available. An 'rpm -qi' tells me the 2.0.1 
> version was installed on my machine on January 18 of this year. I think you 
> need to update your machine. I'll comment about that in your "FC5 Pukes on my 
> machine" thread.
> 

My version of ooo was also installed directly from the FC repositories,
and in fact came from the FC4 CD.

Update my *machine*? You mean the distribution? The beta version of ooo
was dumped into /etc/ after the FC4 upgrade. I know this for certain
because my ooo icons began to malfunction after the upgrade (old and new
versions were installed in different places, and yum was aware of both
versions -- but alas, only one set of icons, so some pointed to one
place and other icons pointed to the old (genuine version 2) binaries).

This problem was resolved by getting yum to list all installed binaries
containing the string "openoffice" in the package name. I made a script
of these package names, and did a collective "yum remove" of all of
them. Then, I asked yum to list available on-line packages with that
string. I made a list of those packages, pared the list down to the main
application names (allowing yum to sort out dependencies rather than
installing everything and anything with the string), and did a
collective "yum install" of those binaries. So far, I have had no
problems, and I now have ooo 2.0.1 on the machine, rather than a beta.

Paul King



--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml