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.