Hi Vladen On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:15:34 Valden Longhurst wrote: > Ah, the power of UNIX-like operating system (which Linux is just one) is > sometimes seen as a disadvantage.
Oh, I don't regard it as a disadvantage. It's just that those end-users coming from other OS's will generally find references to such things ad consoles and command lines confusing, since they are not used to them. > There are many ways to install > software on these systems: > * the faithful tar solution > * variety of rpm solutions > * variety of dpkg and/or aptitude and/or apt-get > * yast > * autopackage > * synaptic > * alien > * pkgadd > * ips > * and many more > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system) These can generally be classified as Graphical and non-graphical tools. > > Then, again, Windows has multiple ways of installing as well. Some of > them include: > * Appsnap > * Appupdater > * Windows-get > * Cygwin > * GetIt > yet we don't show these alternative Windows ways in either the > administrator's guide or this general-purpose install guide. So why not show the method using graphical tools in the *nix instructions (where applicable), and leave the non-graphical instructions as a reference under "Alternative Methods"? > > I fall back to my first suggestion to "specify we focus on using > instructions for our installation packages" and then we write up > instructions for these official installation packages. My focus is "which *type* of installation tools should we write for?". IMO, we should describe the overall method using generic graphical tools. For instance, on my Mandriva system, when I start a download in Firefox, I get a dialog asking whether I want to "Open the file using Ark (default)" (there's a drop-down so I can choose a different archive manager if I wish), or "Save to Disk". My instruction to someone would be to select the former. Firefox then downloads the tarball and then opens it.... My next instruction would be to click the "Extract" icon in the toolbar, and extract the files to /home/<user>/tmp . I'd then tell them to open Konqueror (or Dolphin in KDE 4), and navigate to the directory. Then click in the window, and press <Ctrl + A> to select all. Next, right-click on a selected file and choose the "Open With-->Software installer" entry (this will fire up gurpmi). Choose "Install" in the dialog, enter the root password and click "OK" for the next dialog. The above is one of the methods I personally use. There are other ways, but they are a little more complex. Certainly I can do a lot of that with one line in a terminal ($ su # tar zxvf <filename> && rpm -U *.rpm springs to mind), but for a "Joe Sixpack" that would be more confusing than giving instructions for a graphical install. I am sure there would be a similar series of actions in Gnome, and also in a Debian-based distro > The official > installations packages *used to* include the ./setup method which runs a > graphical install but, alas, the OpenOffice.org 3.1 releases do not > include this file!! :-( That setup script still exists in the i586 Linux RPM download. > > Alex Fisher wrote: > > Hi all. My 2c below.... > > <snip> > > > I use the graphical tools almost exclusively (I'll happily use a CLI for > > some functions, for example I use urpmi for a quick install of something > > I need). > > > > If we want to see a greater adoption of Linux in its various flavours, > > then we need to focus on using the graphical tools provided with the > > various distros, and move the non-graphical instructions to the Admin > > guide(s). Face it, the average end user is completely dumbstruck by such > > a seemingly simple statement as "Open a terminal...". Most ordinary end > > users will say "WTF?!?!?! What does that mean?" and give up. > > > >> I propose to change these to something like "how to unpack using a > >> preinstalled unpack utility" in your favourite window manager. It would > >> focus on GNOME, with a small note about that the method is very similar > >> on most modern Linux desktops. > > > > Why this pre-occupation with Gnome? Just because certain (IMO > > second-rate) distros use that as the default, does *not* mean we should > > focus on it. I think there are probably as many users of KDE as there are > > of Gnome (possibly more, actually). And yes, I have tried both. In > > essence, we should *not* /focus/ on any single WM or distro. > > Strongly agreed to not focus on any specific distribution. Not just distros, but window managers (although I think we could safely leave Xfce and other less used WMs out of it). > > > We need to have two separate sections for the extraction process > > (FileRoller or whatever the default Gnome archiver is currently) and Ark > > for KDE users (the procedure might be similar, but the interface is > > different). > > We, at some point, have to draw the line somewhere. > > The developers have walked this line quite well by releasing official > installs for > * Windows > * Linux RPM > * Linux DEB > * Linux 64 RPM > * Linux 64 DEB > * Linux IA64 RPM > * Solaris x86 > * Solaris SPARC > * Mac OSX Intel > * Mac OSX PPC > > As indicated near the beginning of this e-mail there are many > possibilities on how to install OpenOffice.org. The line of demarcation > is to "specify we focus on using instructions for our installation > packages." I would add "... using the tools most likely to be used by the end-user." IMO, that means graphical tools for Windows and Linux > From the official download site, the installation packages > come as exe, tar.gz, and dmg files. The focus, then, would be on > installing using these file types and methods: > * Windows = setup.exe But tell me, do we tell a Windows user to open a DOS prompt and type in commands? I have occasionally seen instructions telling them to select the "Run..." option from the Start menu, but even then the same result can be achieved by using Windows Explorer to navigate to the directory and(double-)clicking on the file. > * Linux RPM = tar -zxvf . . . rpm -ivh *.rpm > * Linux DEB = tar -zxvf . . . dpkg -i *.deb > * Linux 64 RPM = tar -zxvf . . . rpm -ivh *.rpm > * Linux 64 DEB = tar -zxvf . . . dpkg -i *.deb > * Linux IA64 RPM = tar -zxvf . . . rpm -ivh *.rpm > * Solaris x86 = ??? but consider > http://erinet.se/ooo/doc/instructions.html#sol > * Solaris SPARC = ??? but consider > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Administration_Guide >/Solaris * Mac OSX Intel = ??? but consider > http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/10209910 > http://erinet.se/ooo/doc/instructions.html#sol > * Mac OSX PPC = ??? but consider > http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org/Installation#Mac_OS_X > http://erinet.se/ooo/doc/instructions.html#sol > > > Then we need to have some tool-specific sections. For example, there > > needs to be a section on using Rpmdrake (Mandriva), YaST, etc., starting > > with instructions on how to set the extraction directory as a repository > > (I always extract the the same directory, and have that directory set as > > an update source, as an example). > > > > If needed, I could work on the section dealing with Mandriva (which would > > probably be of use to the Francophone group too), since that is my > > preferred distro (I've been trying different distros for about 12 years > > now). > > > > But, to return to my first point, the normal end user is confused when > > they are told to do something at the command line. Most "younger" users > > have never even seen a command line, really only those who have used DOS > > (or VMS, or Unix) have any knowledge of typing commands into a CLI, and > > we are in the minority. The User Guide *must* focus on th needs of the > > majority, and they are the ones who really cannot be expected to > > understand how to use the command line. > > I think it is a safe assumption that the majority would be installing > OpenOffice.org through their distributor's graphical packager manager. > IF that assumption is true, then these manuals we are talking about > don't apply to them as the end user obtained OpenOffice.org through a > channel other than the official download site. Not true. Many will be downloading (or obtaining a DVD of) the official install sets - I'm one (and always have been; I detest the version supplied by Mandriva. It's always quite some time behind the official release too). > > As a side note, we should in our documentation also "make reference to > alternative methods of install can be found elsewhere." :-) And IMO this is where non-graphical methods belong. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@documentation.openoffice.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@documentation.openoffice.org -- Alex Fisher Co-Lead, CD-ROM Project OpenOffice.org Marketing Community Contact Australia/New Zealand http://distribution.openoffice.org/cdrom/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@documentation.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@documentation.openoffice.org
