On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 04:12 -0700, Alex Lancaster wrote:
Caolan, do you have any best practices recommendations for the naming of the openoffice.org extensions?
I've no real strong feelings one way or the other, I found it convenient for e.g. writer2latex which had multiple subpackages where one of them was the openoffice.org extension to call that subpackage openoffice.org-FOO, I guess just use your own judgement here.
Also, will this particular extension, which is packaged as an .oxt file, be able to be installed using the unopkg tool as suggested on that page? i.e. are .oxt files intended to be installed using the unopkg tool?
Oh yes, you can just do unopkg add --shared OOoLatex-4.0.0-beta-2-linux.oxt -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
or if you want to use the linking mechanism to avoid duplicating the contents of that .oxt at registration time then you can use something like
%install unzip OOoLatex-4.0.0-beta-2-linux.oxt -d /usr/share/OOoLatex.uno.pkg
and then have ...
echo yes | unopkg add --shared --link /usr/share/OOoLatex.uno.pkg -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
and
unopkg remove --shared net.sourceforge.ooolatex -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
C.