Here's a useful thing to know: "The packages available from the Amazon Linux AMI yum repository in Amazon EC2 are designed to work with the Amazon Linux AMI. In addition, the Amazon Linux AMI has been built to be binary-compatible with the CentOS series of releases, and therefore packages built to run on CentOS should also run on the Amazon Linux AMI."
Taken from http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/AmazonLinuxAMIBasics.html So, in other words, you should be able to install the RPMs from CentOS for openoffice. Despite the claim of binary compatability, I'd still make sure that Amazon Linux has its own X client package, though. Most headless systems use the (virtual) graphics card to do high-speed rendering, even though they don't actually route the output directly to a terminal screen. Attempting to pull a CentOS X client might not work. Tim On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 17:43 -0500, Mike Rathburn wrote: > The openoffice-writer is actually just a headless version of OpenOffice that > will handle conversions of files such as Word, Excel, or RTF to work with the > fax gateway. No GUI, just shell scripts. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Holloway [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 5:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Determining Exact Linux Version > > Actually, they didn't actually claim what distro they've spun off. > Although they explicitly support RHEL from about 5.1 up, EPEL is also good > for CentOS, and for all I know, SuSe. > > But pbone is, like EPEL, extensions outside the main distro trunk. When I > searched it for OpenOffice-writer, what I got were version 2.x releases for > ArkLinux and for TurboLinux. You wouldn't want any of those. > > Actually, I have serious misgivings about running OpenOffice in Amazon's > cloud. For one thing, I have serious misgivings about running ANY X GUI-based > stuff from the cloud, between the firewall considerations and the likelihood > that performance is likely to be disappointing. It's rather telling that they > didn't include it as part of their base repo. > > If I wanted cloud-based document editing, I'd be more inclined to go with > Google Docs and leave the cloud for webapp servers and back-office batch > processes. > > Tim > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 > RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml > Unsubscribe [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml Unsubscribe [email protected]
