On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 04:43 -0700, Alex Lancaster wrote: > Thanks for the suggestions. Is the "net.sourceforge.ooolatex" > something you derived from the webpage, or is that somehow also in the > .oxt? Actually I just unopkg add'ed it and then unopkg list --shared and looked at what was the name of the extra extension listed there to figure out what OOoLaTeX called itself. I could probably have alternatively found that out by grovelling through the code. > Also, in this case it appears that upstream insists on including some > binaries in the .oxt file (they don't seem to distribute a true > OS-independent source tarball) > 21150 11-01-07 12:42 bin/Linuxi386/latex2emf > 28692 11-01-07 12:43 bin/Linuxppc/latex2emf > 710928 11-01-07 12:41 lib/i386/libEMF.so.1 > 717884 11-01-07 12:40 lib/ppc/libEMF.so.1 > -------- ------- > 1676064 35 files > > I assume the thing to do in the case is simply remove the files in > bin/ and lib/ after installing them in the %install section as you > describe above is the best way to deal with those? That should work I'd say, assuming that the package hasn't hardcoded those paths into itself somewhere, pity that the upstream doesn't have a pure source package but seeing as it just looks like a hack to have latex2emf available for execution by some starbasic code we'll probably get away with it. C. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
