Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xarchiver - Archive manager for Xfce https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217311 ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-11-28 19:52 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > I don't think the x-lha and x-lhz should be in mime in > .desktop file since lha is not in fedora. I think it is the > same for x-rar. I also don't think that deb and rpm should > be included in the mime handled by xarchiver since it > doesn't really seems to handle rpm or deb as rpm or deb but > unarchive them. x-ar seems wrong to me too. All of these mimetypes are included in file-roller and/or ark packages from Core, too. And why not adding xarchiver for rpms and debs? file-roller or ark also can't do more then list/extact debs/rpms, noone expects an achive manager to install packages. I use file-roller a lot to quickly look into rpms, get the spec from an srpm etc. The default action still is system-install-packages, so IMO adding xarchiver can't do no harm. > Regarding htmlview, a patch is also needed, currently it is > not used in the code! I created a small patch for htmlview, also added epiphany, konqueror and seamonkey. http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras/review/SPECS/xarchiver.spec http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras/review/SRPMS/xarchiver-0.4.6-2.fc7.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review