I am sorry. I misunderstood your intent. Yes, it does seem like a bug
and should be addressed.
I cannot shed any light on this specific subject, since I am not using
any 4.x LO version. I am keeping with the stable 3.6+ series until
4.1.4+ is released. Then I may try it, depending on the complaints I
see on this forum. That is just my computer policy.
As for desktop integration (DI) being kde-specific, I don't think that
is the case. Yes, there were, and still are in the 3.6 series, several
versions of desktop integration for the different desktop environments
(DEs). However, I just checked my 22.214.171.124 version and there are now
only three: freedesktop, mandriva, and suse. There is no kde or
gnome-specific version and the freedesktop DI seems to be the coming
standard http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/ , with mandriva and suse the
final holdouts in the 126.96.36.199 case. So, I suspect if you select
freedesktop for your gnome DE, it should work for you. It works for my
KDE DE. In fact, gnome and kde are now so similar in API (Application
Programming Interface) that they will run each others' apps (kde and
gtk) and share the desktop directories/links, if not the menus. You may
have also read the reply to this thread that the LO 4.1 series no longer
has separate DI rpm package files, but has the DI integrated into the
main package. I suspect that integration is the freedesktop DI, but that
is just a guess.
The bottom line is that this problem you are experiencing - not being
able to run the main LO program or any of the sub-apps - does seem like
a bug to me. Not being able to select a particular DI, may not be a
bug, but just evolution.
Hope this helps.
sun shine wrote:
This is a topic I have some interest in and have been following.
While I am aware of the capacity to run the soffice script from the
terminal and even creating a custom launcher for the Gnome, XFCE4 and
in Mint, Mate panels, what I am curious about is exactly why doing so
is even necessary in the first place?
This will have been the first time in my experience of using OOo and
now LibO that doing this manually is necessary, and it makes me wonder
what value the desktop-integration package has if the user still needs
to do this customised approach to get the application to work.
Are you able to shine any light on the matter? Is this an oversight
from the 4.1. beta developers, a bug, or - a feature? Similarly, any
ideas about why this desktop integration (which doesn't) is only
geared for the KDE and not for Gnome (and Gnome-like) DEs?
Thanks for any insights you can share.
On 21/07/13 20:47, Girvin R. Herr wrote:
Have you tried bringing LibreOffice up with "soffice" in a terminal
shell, or unambiguously, "/opt/libreoffice4.1/program/soffice" (less
quotes, of course)?
If that works, then you could manually add a link in your menu or at
least an icon on your desktop.
soffice is the main libreoffice program or, more accurately, script,
that invokes the other programs (Writer, Calc, etc.). If that program
is not run first, then the others may not be initialized properly to
You could also run writer, calc, etc. from a terminal and see what
messages are output from it. They may give you a clue as to why it
isn't running properly. But my bet is on soffice.
FYI: "soffice" is a legacy name from the StarOffice days. Maybe some
day the devs will get around to changing that - unless it would break
Hope this helps.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] desktop-integration · Petr Mladek
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy