Bug#223671: openoffice.org-gnome: No icons or menu items for GNOME 1
Package: openoffice.org-gnome
Version: 1.1.0-2
Severity: normal
Is openoffice.org-gnome just intended for GNOME 2? If so, it should say
it in the description:
"GNOME desktop integration for OpenOffice.org
This package contains parts of OpenOffice.org that integrate with the
Gnome desktop, and provides Gnome menu icons."
No mention of GNOME 2. However, this package does not provide the icons
and menu items for GNOME 1.
In GNOME 1 the icons and menu items go into /usr/share/gnome/apps, the
previous OpenOffice had a nice menu dedicated to it, with a nice menu
icon. The menu icon and the item descriptions go in a file called
".directory", this is the one I've just created to fix the problem:
------- /usr/share/gnome/apps/OpenOffice/.directory ----------
[Desktop Entry]
Name=OpenOffice
Name[es]=OpenOffice
Comment=Office Suite
Comment[es]=Programas de Oficina
Icon=/usr/lib/openoffice/share/icons/ooo_writer.png
Type=Directory
--------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it would be nice to have the full internationalization, but I
lost it after the upgrade. If you still have it, you should use that
file.
Please, do include this menus and menu items in the package, or modify
the description of the package to indicate that it's only intended for
GNOME 2.
Regards,
Margarita Manterola <debian@marga.com.ar>
Debian Bug Reporter.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux fobos 2.4.20-1-k7 #1 Sat Mar 22 15:17:52 EST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=es_ES.ISO-8859-1, LC_CTYPE=es_ES.ISO-8859-1
Versions of packages openoffice.org-gnome depends on:
ii libatk1.0-0 1.4.1-1 The ATK accessibility toolkit
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libglib2.0-0 2.2.3-1 The GLib library of C routines
ii libgtk2.0-0 2.2.4-2 The GTK+ graphical user interface
ii libpango1.0-0 1.2.5-2 Layout and rendering of internatio
ii openoffice.org 1.1.0-2 high-quality office productivity s
-- no debconf information
Reply to: