"Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote:

The OpenOffice.org installer should setup file associations in GNOME and KDE.

If you haven't noticed, UNIX systems _always_ set file associations in the GUI, not the kernel/UNIX executive subsystem. This is a security/safety issue.

Windows _always_ ties associations to the Windows executive. That's why if you sent a .jpg file to the Windows executive thinking it will launch Photoshop, but it begins with "MZ", Windows will run it as an .exe. This is a core, inherent design flaw to Windows itself and if Microsoft changes it, about 98% of Windows programs out there will break.**

Furthermore, most UNIX GUIs and programs do _not_ trust extensions, but check the "file magic" (i.e., internal file format) instead. Especially when it comes to Internet programs. E.g., Mozilla Thunderbird and Ximian Evolution trust _neither_ the MIME Type declared _nor_ the extension of the file. They will immediately tell you what the true format of the file is (if it is known).

So although Windows has a serious security design flaw in its executive that can't be changed for compatibility, at least by using Windows programs (like Mozilla Thunderbird) which test for "file magic" tremendously help the situation.

File magic is also why most Freedomware-based SMTP gateways actually prevent executables and other trojan horses from entering the network, whereas about 80% of the Exchange SMTP gateway scanners stupidly trust MIME Type and/or extension. It's gotten batter in the case of the latter in the last 1-2 years. But I less than 2 years ago being at 2 Fortune 100 companies that had scanning systems easily bypassed by simply changing the declared MIME Type or extension allowed me to bypass the scanning.

-- Bryan

**NOTE: Does anyone know who I can _shoot_ for creating the WINE service/kernel .exe support so the Linux kernel/executive automatically launches WINE when it gets an .exe? Someone should absolutely be _shot_ for doing that, let alone packagers for allow it to be turned on by default upon install. I know they do it for "compatibility," but _stupid_ "compatibility" be damned, I don't want it if I merely install the WINE package.

Simon Perreault nomis80@lqt.ca wrote:

You still have to give it execute permission. Where's the problem? Isn't that exactly the same as calling

/usr/bin/perl

when there's a Perl script starting with #!/usr/bin/perl that's executable?

I typically prevent this by putting "noexec" on the VFAT filesystem I mount. But yes, I don't like the fact that many packages setup the the WINE execution daemon. I want to say I've even seen it execute without the bit set, but maybe I'm reaching.

Dave Gutteridge wrote:

...

Dave, there is an article on the Internet that you must read. Here is the link: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Thank you for the article. However, I think you have missed my point. I am not looking for Linux to be like Windows. Nor am I advocating any approach that Windows does, or in favour of making any changes to make Linux in any way like Windows.

All I am saying is that I am an ex-Windows user who is trying to find points of references so that I can understand how Linux works. Actually, a long time ago I used to work regularly on an Irix system, and Mac comes in and out of my life depending on my job. But as I've been a regular user of Windows since, well, since there was Windows, I can't help the fact that is has significantly shaped my perception of how computers work in general.

Ahhhh !!!! Just harken back to (glorious, IMHO) IRIX, & you should be off to the races. Many common Linux command line commands are named for their IRIX equivalents, so the familiarity should return quickly.

<snip>

Dave _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

.

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Dave Gutteridge wrote:

One might think so, but it was seven years ago since I was running SoftImage on Irix machines. Except for a brief experiment with running Linux about 6 years ago, I haven't touched a UNIX/IRIX/Linux machine since, and the commands are long since forgotten. I still remember basic concepts, like the differences between a super user and regular user, and file permissions and those kinds of general principles. But specific commands I can't remember at all.

The 'file' command will tell you whether a file is a shell script, compiled executable, etc by interpreting the 'file magic' that Bryan mentioned. The OO installed 'usually' creates an 'Office' group on the start button of your window manager. File associations (between an extension and a program) are much looser than in Windows land, being enforced only by convention on the command line, and by individual preferences within graphical file browsers.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jim Wildman, CISSP, RHCE jim@rossberry.com http://www.rossberry.com "Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine

On Friday 05 August 2005 09.06, Dave Gutteridge wrote:

Well, this problem is sort of solved. I now understand that Linux doesn't just have an equivelant to ".exe", and that some reconfiguration of my thinking will be required to wrap my head around it. I'm going to go out and hunt for Linux books soon, and hopefully get more of a feel for this sort of thing.

Note that this contains only general help and was not meant to be applied to the openoffice situation (where your solution below is much better).

For what it's worth, here's how I usually find the answer to "which executables did this package install?":

rpm -ql PACKAGE | grep bin

It's not perfect and sometimes you'll get false hits, but I like it. It works since almost all executables in linux are placed in directories called something..bin...something.

If you're not strong on rpm commands, here's what it means in human-readable form: rpm query the list of files installed for package PACKAGE and pipe (feed) it to grep that only lets lines that contains "bin" through.

/Peter

As for Open Office Beta, it turns out that the problem in getting it started was that when I did the RPM install, I missed a subdirectory which had the RPMs for menu items and MIME integrations. So I uninstalled and reinstalled OpenOffice Beta, this time being careful to get all the right components lined up, and voila, I have OpenOffice Beta working like a charm. Menu icons and everything.

Thanks to everyone who offered suggestions. As is always the case, I not only solved the problem, but learned a thing or two about some related issues along the way.

Dave