From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jun 27 11:21: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E8F37B61E for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 11:20:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97]) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #4) id 136zyW-0000qV-00; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:20:44 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA76309; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:20:43 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:20:43 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: Matthew Hunt Cc: Christoph Sold , Rahul Siddharthan , questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux emulation and office suites Message-ID: <20000627192043.A76159@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20000627025036.A63418@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20000627113714.D5878@physics.iisc.ernet.in> <20000627131638.A70989@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3958B8C1.7C37DA6E@i-clue.de> <20000627111135.A87093@wopr.caltech.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20000627111135.A87093@wopr.caltech.edu>; from mph@astro.caltech.edu on Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 11:11:35AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 11:11:35AM -0700, Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 04:22:57PM +0200, Christoph Sold wrote: > > > IMHO it would be _very_ nice to have StarOffice rtunning under *BSD, > > either in Linux emulation, or -even better- native. > > You mean like /usr/ports/editors/staroffice5 ? > > I don't know how this vicious rumor of it not being ports got > started. I've never used it (although my officemate found it > useful under Solaris), but I easily found it with: i think there are two possibilities here. first, the bsd port is often a minor revision or so behind the most recent release. so staroffice 5.2 MIGHT not yet have a port, while 5.1 clearly does. i don't know simply because i haven't checked the ports. it would obviously be easy enough to do. i just haven't yet because i'm not sure what i want to do. the other possibility is that people are referring to the native binary as a port, which it technically is, though not in official bsd terminology. i use this term loosely, so if anyone is waiting in the wings to correct me, i didn't research it so consider this a disclaimer. :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message