<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 4:45 AM, David Timms <<a href="mailto:dtimms@iinet.net.au">dtimms@iinet.net.au</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Mustafa Qasim wrote: >> I have always only used their version since *fedora also hack out bits of >> openoffice code they dont want in for their as per usual political BS*, so >> using OO directly from OO you actually get the complete full OpenOffice, it >> alsoc performs more smoothly I've found. >> > > Hey buddy what does it mean...? Does packaging software for Fedora mean that > we didn't get the real flavor of that software but a censored/edited one? No, yes. Fedora's policy is for a complete open source distribution. If upstream have parts of their code that have incompatible licensing {no license, ambiguous or too restrictive}, then the fedora package might exclude that part. Packagers usually contact the upstream project to try to get clarifications on such issues, sometimes even to convince them to use a less restrictive license. Secondly, many times upstream source won't build into a buildable, runnable, useful rpm for Fedora, and packagers need to work out ways to make it work. Thirdly, Fedora packagers may develop compilation/build and or source patches to get the package working in Fedora. We try to get the patch accepted and included upstream, but it is not uncommon for patches to stay in upstream queue for months/ years/ never. Instead of continuing with a broken build or crashing app, Fedora does release with a patch, including those submitted upstream, but not yet included in a release. Fourthly, patented algorithms /code will never be included in Fedora. Instead of excluding the whole package, the Fedora community has generally tried to work with upstream to make it possible to remove the patented/problematic code, but in such a way that the functionality can be added back to the software with an external package {in locations where the patent doesn't apply etc}. A fifth difference is our policy to exclude statically linked libraries from Fedora builds. This means that calls to a specific library will be calling the Fedora packaged library, rather than a copy of the library that upstream may have taken internally. This reduces compiled code size {eg for one I'm working on: the application executable is 550kB rather than 4500kB}. It also means that when the library is patched to fix bugs or security issues, that all packages using that library will benefit from the update {and be protected security wise}. This is a time saver in both patch management and security risk assessment. By the way, because Fedora is a fully open project, you may choose to browse the package spec file, eg: <a href="http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/openoffice.org/F-8/" target="_blank">http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/openoffice.org/F-8/</a> <a href="http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/openoffice.org/F-8/openoffice.org.spec?view=markup" target="_blank">http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/openoffice.org/F-8/openoffice.org.spec?view=markup</a> Indeed if you have packaging or coding skills, can supply patches, or have found bugs or Requests For Enhancements etc, you are most welcome to join the Fedora community: <a href="http://fedoraproject.org/en/join-fedora" target="_blank">http://fedoraproject.org/en/join-fedora</a> DaveT. -- fedora-list mailing list <a href="mailto:fedora-list@redhat.com">fedora-list@redhat.com</a> To unsubscribe: <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list</a> </blockquote></div> hmm thanks fellow... i got it.. -- Regards, Mustafa Qasim Lahore, Pakistan Cell: 0321-6614972 URL: <a href="http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MustafaQasim">http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MustafaQasim</a> Registered Linux User# 441709.