From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Apr 29  6:17:59 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from smtp1.vnet.net (smtp1.vnet.net [166.82.1.31])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4114B14D1B
	for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 06:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from rivers@dignus.com)
Received: from dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48])
	by smtp1.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA25630;
	Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:18:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes.dignus.com [10.0.0.3])
	by dignus.com (8.9.2/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA34382;
	Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:17:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.9.2/8.6.9) id JAA21100; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:17:42 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:17:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>
Message-Id: <199904291317.JAA21100@lakes.dignus.com>
To: jb@cimlogic.com.au, rivers@dignus.com
Subject: Re: Adding desktop support
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199904291205.WAA01206@cimlogic.com.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> >  I point out that if the executable has no icon in it, then this
> >  "overrides" from the window manager would come into play, right?
> > 
> >  Since the "overrides" have to be there anyway - what's the advantage
> >  of putting the icon in the exe?
> 
> Window managers wrap top-level windows of active processes. The icon
> in the exe is for browsing the file system prior to executing the
> process. These are two _very_ different things.
> 

 Ah.. I see... something like Window's  "Explorer"?

 And, why wouldn't something based on file(1) with an association
 of file-type to icon do the same thing?

 At least, I know when I want to "explore" a directory on UNIX,
 I typically do:

   cd <dir>
   file *

 It seems, however, that the disadvantage of that is the all executables
 show up with the same "icon".  Now, perhaps, I'm beginning to see
 a good reason for this.

 	1) If I were implementing an "explorer", ala Windows

		 and 

	2) If we neglect multiuser impacts (i.e. don't allow
	   users to, on a per-user basis, change the icon)
	   (Maybe to do this, all the user needs is write access
	   to the executable... - which would seem to allow a
	   user to change his own icons & not the system ones.)

		and

	3) Provide default icons based on the output of file(1),  or
	   maybe on file extension... or whatever... (perhaps
	   taylorable on a per-user basis.)


 then, placing an icon in an exe, would make sense... yes.  In fact,
 I rather like that idea.


	- Dave Rivers -



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message