[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Some issues with oo.o 1.0.0-3



        Hi again!

 Thanks for the Cc, don't forget it next time, too :)

* Chris Halls <chris.halls@gmx.de> [2002-05-13 14:47]:
> On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 01:42:58PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>>  openoffice registers itself in ~/.mailcap -- at the *start*.  Would be
>> nice to have it at the end instead.
> 
> Um, I think that's an upstream issue, isn't it?

 Am not sure, didn't check the source about it - just noticed it :) But
I guess it's upstream if you don't know about it *smirks*

> Um... actually, they are supposed to be in there - you found a bug.  Run
> update-mime with -3 installed and you'll find them in there :)

 Yes, it's in there now.

> It'll be fixed in -4 (postinst is missing ATM).

 Good, users shouldn't have to run update-mime themself ,)  So for it's
in there now it would be a good idea snip out the ~/.mailcap handling
completely (doubled work through update-mime && users might have/want no
~/.mailcap).

> I don't know what happens with ~/.mailcap - it's beyond my
> understanding/control currently ;)

 I can't promise anything but I'll try to track that one down (grep -r ,)

[openoffice script checks for ~/.openoffice hardcoded instead of
  checking ~/.sversionrc]
> Hmm, well at least with a fixed ~/.openoffice we know if the user ran setup
> manually for themselves :)
> 
> The whole setup thing needs looking at - making this one change won't fix a
> great deal and will make it harder to tell if there was another problem.  It
> needs a good solution, not just another hack.

 I am not that good in posix scripting, maybe I can find a dirty hack
for that openoffice script to check that...  I think we have to at least
have the version "OpenOffice.org 1.0" hardcoded in the script for the
check within the .sversionrc file, or is there a way to get that version
string from somewhere?

>> ~/.gnome/apps/OpenOffice.org 1.0/mathdoc.desktop
> 
> Yup, that's upstream.  I already filed an issue, no. 4602 [1]

 Ah, thanks.

> Yes, that sounds like it's likely to be an upstream problem.  I'm not 100%
> sure that the registration process actually works yet...

 Well, I sometimes get the impression that I must be the only user in
the world behind a auth-proxy.  I run into such problems all the time -
but that only makes our systems better, doesn't it :)

 Have fun,
Alfie
-- 
The trouble with you
Is the trouble with me.
Got two good eyes
But we still don't see.           -- Robert Hunter, "Workingman's Dead"

Attachment: pgpAHqZ9KflAL.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: