From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 28 17:14:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from palrel3.hp.com (palrel3.hp.com [156.153.255.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD61D15122 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:14:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from srmail.sr.hp.com (srmail.sr.hp.com [15.4.45.14]) by palrel3.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id RAA16877 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:14:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com by srmail.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA013184857; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:14:17 -0700 Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id RAA24394 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199904290014.RAA24394@mina.sr.hp.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adding desktop support (please don't) Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:26:15 EDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 1.1.1.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:14:16 -0700 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Chuck Robey wrote: > Agreed, but I think you're missing the point. It's not the HAVING of a > resource fork that's the key, any programmer working in isolation can > have that. It's the having a standard place to stick those resource > forks, and a standard method to get and find them, that's the key thing. Other key points: * With icons in the binary, maintainance is easier ("How much easier?", is another issue, though). It's much easier to maintain icons if they're attached to the executable. Also, among other things, you don't run into the problem of having out-of-date icons when upgrading binaries. [ Yes, in theory, things like this don't happen with proper installation procedures, but they're all too common in real life. ] * Probable less disk space. It sounds as if adding an icon to an executable will only add a few tens of bytes. If you make the icon a separate file (per icon), the disk space requirements skyrocket (what's the default frag size for FFS -- I forget?). Of course, you could have an icon database to get around this, but you make icon maintanance much more difficult. Disk space is also pretty cheap these days but, if people are screaming over a piddly few bytes, they'll scream even louder when you start talking about Kbytes. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Hewlett-Packard, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message