On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:30:12AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > Hi, > > Guido Günther wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 01:25:12AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > > And it's now a Type=MimeType one (thus no Exec=), so I wonder where it > > > belongs. (And it probably won't fix this bug at all, as you want oxt > > /usr/share/mimelnk? > > Oh, that still exists? It's at lease used by KDE3 so it won't hurt. Having the appropriate info in /usr/share/mime for Gnome/KDE4 is more important though - but maybe it's already there - which Mimetype is given for the extension?
> > > > associated with somethig executable so that users don't need to go to > > > the extension manager themselves) > > This depends. Is the MimeType specified in the ooo-extension.desktop > > mapped to one of the applications .desktop files? If so we just need to > > install that one to /usr/share/mimelnk. If not something like: > > > > [Desktop Entry] > > Version=1.0 > > Encoding=UTF-8 > > Terminal=false > > Type=Application > > NoDisplay=True > > Exec=openoffice %U > > unopkg gui %U if we get an own .desktop for this. Yeah, even better. > > Regards, > > Rene > > P.S.: I am still not sure I want people make it that easy to run into problems > this way when they try to install binary extensions (see e.g. see #502812, and > no, it's IMHO not an option to build against an internal, ancient version of > STLport again) but that would be no regression to 2.4.1... I think we should. The extension I used worked perfectly (and I might end up packaging it) but we shouldn't try to block users from installing extensions by not adding a mapping. In the worst case there should be a warning in the unopkg gui. -- Guido -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]