LibreOffice: from repos or their own website?
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
Where do you prefer to get LibreOffice? From Trisquel repos (older version, presumably more stable but less features) or from their own website, which has a deb package that can install itself like a charm (newer, maybe with some undiscovered bugs but more features).
Or since I am asking, do you prefer OpenOffice instead?
I am a translator!
I install software ONLY from my repo. The few applications I don't find in my repo or that are of an older version and don't work properly I wget the source, untar, install the dependencies and compile.
I prefer libre to open!! And yes, I'm perfectly fine with older versions of my applications as long as they work as they should.
cheers Gnuser!
In general I prefer to use as much software as possible from Trisquels repo. If its buggy version in Trisquel repo (Liferea) or I must have "the newest version" I find another source but that isnt many programs. Libreoffice version included in Trisquel 7 works great for me.
I use the KISS principle.
I don't have a need for the latest LibreOffice release. The only reason I would download LibreOffice from the LibreOffice website is if I found that I did need the latest version for some particular reason.
Admittedly I don't do a lot with Office suites. Usually just need to open some documents that people send me. Which is sometimes a problem, when I have an important document that I need to use correctly (stuff like CVs, legal documents that need to be returned, etc) I need the best compatibility with Microsoft Office (since usually most docs I receive are in that format). Latest versions are better in that regard but are more prone to cause problems with newest features. For me personally I usually go with the deb package they provide. But might give a go for the repos version, basically because it is annoying not being able to update without repeating the entire process. Automatic updates solve that.
was curious as to how other people here preferred it.
Thanks for the replies.
Also, I like my all my programs to be fast. LibreOffice seems to improve booting times with each new release. Was very pleased with the improvement from 3 to 4 and was wondering how it would be now in 5.
The PPA from https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+archive/ubuntu/ppa is very up to date and recommended.
I use LibreOffice in the repos until I make a decision that there is a special feature in the newer version that I need to use. When that happens, I download the deb from the oficial website and I install it in all pcs of the network that work together even if they use another OS.
I use LibreOffice 5 from their PPA-- it's definately a great improvement over 4.
Version 4 should work for your needs just fine, if you want to avoid PPAs and stick to Trisquel's repo.
And no, I don't use OpenOffice. There isn't any reason to-- Apache's pretty much abandoned it, leaving it to rot into obscurity.
Have you noticed improvements in terms of speed (booting and general usage) and compatibility with MS Office?
I am still trying to decide if I will use the PPA or not.
I read a recent blog post from Apache saying they would like to have contributions from other derivatives (apparently most of their code shows up in other derivatives but there is little giving back, dunno if that is the case of LO or not).
LO5 is slightly faster than 4 (works better with xmonad, as well), and has extremely better compatibility with MS Office formats.
LO has the advantage of being able to incorperate code from Apache into LO, but not vice-versa. Apache's pretty much dead, friend.
"LO has the advantage of being able to incorperate code from Apache into LO, but not vice-versa."
Is that because of licensing issues?
"Apache's pretty much dead, friend."
Just for clarity, do you mean *Apache* is dead, or *Apache OpenOffice* is dead?
LibreOffice is copylefted, whereas OpenOffice is distributed under a permissive license. So, yes, it is a licensing "issue".
Apache is far from dead! But Apache OpenOffice really is. There used to be some IBM developers working on it (because IBM had Symphony, which is proprietary software derived from OpenOffice) but they stopped.
Just compare https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/coming_soon_apache_openoffice_4 and https://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2015-08-05-under-the-hood-5-0.html
Apache has released only three major major versions of OpenOffice (against ten for LibreOffice) and they can only claim "dozens of developers", whereas LibreOffice has hundreds and has received "around eleven thousand commits since LibreOffice 4.4".
Is the PPA managed by the Document Foundation themselves?
Usually I only use software from the repos OR when it's very specific software downloaded from the original developer website (the Tor Browser being an example of it, which is really cool seeing as now they have a auto updater included! Wish LibreOffice had the same thing).
I suppose using the PPA means automatic updates, correct? Problem is it means adding another source, which I dislike doing...
Anyway, can someone confirm if the PPA mentioned above is run by the Document Foundation? If not, who runs it?
I don't think so; the PPA's description uses the third person to describe The Document Foundation, and the LibreOffice website doesn't link to it.
Unlike some other apps Libreoffice's non-repo packages can be installed. Basically what I quote below simply Does. Not. Apply to LO.
The few applications I don't find in my repo or that are of an older version and don't work properly I wget the source, untar, install the dependencies and compile.
repo forever
PS openoffice is an almost dead project
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires