OpenBSD Journal

OpenOffice 1.0 native on FreeBSD

Contributed by jose on from the coming-soon-to-OpenBSD? dept.

Andreas writes :
"As seen in freshports and slashdot: OpenOffice native on FBSD. Congrats to the porters! Hopefulley soon on our favourite OS "
OpenOffice is pretty large, and in some places OpenBSD and FreeBSD differ enough that this may be a serious challenge, still, to bring it native to OpenBSD. Still, OpenBSD porters can learn a lot from the effort and possibly revive the latent OpenOffice port.

(Comments are closed)

  1. By Ben Goren () on

    Has anybody had any luck running Linux or FreeBSD binaries under emulation? Personally, I couldn't care which syscalls are being called....


  2. By Nobody You'd Know () on

    For whom, a crack team of chimpanzees? I do ports of lots of software across platforms a lot more different than the various BSDs, and it is mindless drudgework interspersed with a very occasional bit of having to think, but not very hard.

    Get real. The reason this hasn't already happened is not difficulty. It is the fact that it is tedious and BORING.

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Porting something as large as openoffice isn't going to be difficult? Do come off your cloud..and stop being such a dick.

    2. By Also Nobody You'd Know () on

      Coool!! Please port Mozilla to OpenBSD for us. Everyone will love you!

      1. By Aasmund () on


    3. By Somebody You Would Want To Know () on

      While you are at it, please start porting MS Office. And perhaps the Human Brain.

    4. By niekze () on

      that's fucking funny. But you should have said "a lot more complex," than "a lot more different." Either something is different or it is not ;). Otherwise, it would be similar. Anyways, your comment still made me laugh. Not only do developers need a pat on the back when they do something, apparently, they want a pat on the back when someone else does something as well. ;) But isn't most programming tedious and boring? You've already gotten a "then port ____" comment and all you need now is a "then don't fucking use Openbsd. jackass" comment and you'll be on your way to fame and fortune. :)

  3. By Anonymous Coward () on

    I heard the lack of kernel threads was the cause for Mozilla not being ported. I wander if OpenOffice uses kernel threads.
    I mean, FreeBSD has them, it runs OO. Linux has them, and it runs OO. OS X is based on FreeBSD & NetBSD, they support kernel threads, and OO runs on OS X.

    Getting the picture? Or did I forget the take the lens cap off?

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      I heard that you were stupid.
      Go play with your trolls elsewhere.

    2. By Marc Espie () on

      Nope, the lack of kernel threads is definitely not the
      cause for mozilla not being ported.

      mozilla binaries not working is the cause for mozilla
      not being ported.

      1. By _azure () on

        Mozilla ran fine under Linux emulation in 2.9, but has been broken since. It and RealPlayer8 for Linux will both still "run" (and otherwise function fine), but cannot access network resources. Both are functional for local file use.

  4. By Cindy () on

    Is the the word pro that comes with OpenOffice really any better then VI? I mean, isn't VI what most users use for writing text files? I have writen many documents in VI, including my resume, my living will, and many dear john letters.

    What dose it's have to offer that VI dosen't? How can MS-Word, Lotus Word Pro, Wordperfect or any word pro have to compete with VI? VI is one of best text editing tool ever writen.

    If ever one used VI instead of other text editors, we may just peace and joy everywhere in the world. Peace thought VI...

    -- Cindy

    1. By Gioffreus () on

      hehehe =D
      funny, but i certainly agree with you. i'm still a VI newbie by a long shot, a couple months now i think... before that it was mostly ED. i finally broke down and said "time to learn VI"...

      ... and boy oh boy, i'm glad i took the leap! i don't know what i was afraid of... should have done it long ago. don't get me wrong; i will still use ED, but i'll just use it less than before.

      VI makes your troubles disappear =)
      funny thing about *word* processors...
      they *can* be used to actually obscure the *words*. how's that for irony..?

    2. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Word Pro is a word processor and vi is a text editor. You'll notice subtle fonts :p

      1. By edu () on

        Personally I use Vi(M) for writing LaTeX documents, so you could almost call it a wordprocessor. Regular wordprocessors are still next to useless as almost every piece of documentation can be written as fast or faster in LaTeX (you need only one equation in the whole document and MS Word etc. begins to suck).

        If you don't need any fancy formatting that is nothing more than just putting your thoughts in a file, then a regular text file does the job equally well. Nowadays people seem to need formatting *everywhere*, for example what good does it help to list all participants in some event and use word for the job?? What's wrong with a plain list of names in a text file?

        However spreadsheets like Excel and StarCalc are very important tools. Atleast when you're trying to model systems of difference equations or just about any discrete system.

    3. By niekze () on

      If only word processors had vi mode. That would be the *real* feat. :)

      1. By Anonymous Coward () on

        AbiWord [ ] has vi/emacs keybindings mode (to some extent) :)

        Although there is no official OpenBSD port for AbiWord, I can affirm you that the latest released version compiles almost without modifications and runs great on OpenBSD.

        I found that AbiWord serves my needs as a word processor better than other open source office suites, but you experience might be different.

        1. By Anonymous Coward () on

          There are big improvements in Abiword 1.01, but I
          wish they would/could change the way they update the screen. Try using Abiword over a remote
          x-session to see why. It is pretty much unusable for remote sessions :(

    4. By hacho () on

      You can do all file editing with vi, and even use vi for creating documents with a troff/TeX/... format. Fair enough. Now go and tell a customer about the goodness of the OS you are installing for him, great. Next, tell him he must learn and use vi; oh, and donīt worry about nice looking formatting, you should also learn LaTeX.

      Come on, weak up to reality for your own sake if nothing else.

  5. By Jim () no thanks on mailto:no thanks

    Why bother with Word Processors? Lyx gives me better control, better output, awesome printing, with less fuss... And it's already in the ports tree....

    Just my 2 cents.

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Well, Lyx is a different kind of animal and it has it's own quirks...

      Personally I use word processor in the office when I need to quickly print some memo, letter, short instruction on our internal network usage, etc. If all your text fits on one page, it's easier to use word processor than Lyx. I use MS Word under winNT and AbiWord under OpenBSD for those small tasks. For more complex tasks I use Lyx or Quark Xpress.

    2. By Ben Goren () on

      Actually, if you're going to use LyX, you might as well go to the very minor additional bother of writing straight LaTeX. There's pretty much a 1:1 mapping between LyX commands, etc., and what you'd do in LaTeX. As an added bonus, you get to use your favorite text editor to edit the content, your favorite spell checker to fix errros, your favorite version control system to track changes, your favorite....

      If there're things that you can do in LyX that you can't in pure LaTeX, I never found them. Rather, it's the opposite.

      Having said all that, I'd love to have a WISYWIG page layout program such as PageMaker or Quark Xpress. Everything that makes LaTeX so wonderful for its job makes it simply impossible for artistic design jobs.

      As long as I'm dreaming, I'll take a Free alternative to FreeHand / Illustrator. The Gimp's path editor is a step in the right direction, but oh so far away. All the rest follow the MacDraw model, and that just doesn't cut it.


    3. By Anonymous Coward () on

      even better, us TeXmacs.


Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]