David Tardon wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 11:26:35PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> said:
> > My understanding is that /usr/bin/soffice is a symlink in order to
> > keep backwards maintainability. Personally I say both packages drop it
> > because star office is soooo 1999. :)
>
> There's more than just soffice:
>
> $ rpm -ql libreoffice-core | grep bin/ | xargs ls -ld
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 362 Dec 6 18:37 /usr/bin/libreoffice
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 32 Dec 6 18:37 /usr/bin/ooffice
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 39 Dec 6 18:37 /usr/bin/ooviewdoc
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 11 Jan 9 12:46 /usr/bin/openoffice.org ->
> libreoffice
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 38 Jan 9 12:46 /usr/bin/soffice ->
> /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/soffice
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 360 Dec 6 18:37 /usr/bin/unopkg
There is also /usr/bin/oowriter, oocalc, ooimpress, oodraw and oobase
that belong to other libreoffice-* subpackages.
Ugh. That's just one more reason to not allow the Apache fork to be
packaged.
Kevin Kofler