Apps :: Which "openoffice" to download for 256MB system?



^thehatsrule^, meo and Juanito, thank you so far!

One point still to clarify is: What are the differences/advantages/disadvantges/aplicabilities between ".tar.gz" and ".uci" files?

thanks again
Quote
One point still to clarify is: What are the differences/advantages/disadvantges/aplicabilities between ".tar.gz" and ".uci" files?
- .tar.gz mydsl extensions will uncompress the application and write all the files in it to the dsl file system under /opt/myappname. Depending on the application (and openoffice is big) this can use a lot of space and since you are running frugal/toram this will use a lot of memory - 256MB might not even be enough to run openoffice in this way.

.uci mydsl extensions uncompress the files in the application when only required (or something like that) - they will still appear under /opt/myappname but will not use nearly as much memory (In fact hardly anything).
Guess the first post was modified...
Quote
But what about dowloading directly the newest OpenOffice.org 2.4.0 for Linux, (US English version), found at http://download.openoffice.org/index.html

Also, when and why should I be satisfied with applications available at the MyDSL browser rather than looking for the latest version available at the official site, like the newest OpenOffice.org 2.4.0 for Linux?

Is it likely an application should first be trimmed down by experts to fit DSL needs before it should be attempt to be used?
If it doesn't say anything in the .info, then it's probably just repackaged to the MyDSL standards with icons/links, etc.

If you feel you need the latest one you could always try that it.
You could also make/request an extension for it.
^thehatsrule^, you are right as I had to edit my first post - by mistake I posted it without the text.

You all, thanks a lot so far for your inputs - it is a great help!

For now I will try "openoffice.org2.0.uci" ... I am letting it download now and I'll try it tomorrow.

Again thanks a lot!
About using the latest from a project's site:
If they do offer binaries, they can be used just fine, as long as they work on DSL. Sometimes the binaries are compiled with newer libraries than in DSL, so they won't work.
It's also a question of convenience, when you have a tarball you need to figure where to unpack it to not have it hog ram etc. and DSL extensions go to the right place automatically.
Next Page...
original here.