Ask Your Question

Why can't a get a plain vanilla tarball of LibreOffice 4.x.x binaries? [closed]

asked 2014-10-02 09:50:54 +0100

einpoklum gravatar image

updated 2020-07-24 08:55:04 +0100

Alex Kemp gravatar image

Suppose I want to install LibreOffice in some obscure Linux distro which doesn't use APT or RPM. Or I want to install it on, say, Debian, but I don't officially have the appropriate dependencies. Or I want to put it somewhere in /opt.

To do all this I need a tarball with the binaries. But - doesn't offer that. Why?

Edit: Fix bad url

edit retag flag offensive reopen merge delete

Closed for the following reason the question is answered, right answer was accepted by Alex Kemp
close date 2016-03-04 18:24:58.872669

2 Answers

Sort by » oldest newest most voted

answered 2014-10-03 12:04:40 +0100

oweng gravatar image

updated 2016-03-05 02:22:29 +0100

LibreOffice, like many other package producers, targets the primary distributions / package managers (e.g., DEB and RPM) with the expectation that this caters to the majority of GNU/Linux users. By way of example, the .tar.xz, .txz (Arch Linux) and .tgz,.txz, .tbz, .tlz (Slackware) package formats are less widely used and these distributions are also generally deployed by those more willing to build their own tarball from the source.

edit flag offensive delete link more

answered 2014-10-02 23:09:38 +0100

karolus gravatar image

whats with the Source.tar-files

edit flag offensive delete link more


Those are source packages, rather than binary packages in the indicated format i.e., .tar.xz, .txz (Arch Linux) or .tgz, .txz, .tbz, .tlz (Slackware).

oweng gravatar imageoweng ( 2014-10-03 11:55:17 +0100 )edit

Question Tools

1 follower


Asked: 2014-10-02 09:50:54 +0100

Seen: 252 times

Last updated: Mar 05 '16