Bug#502737: [openoffice.org-writer] Missing mime-mapping entry for .oxt
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
Reply to: