Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 11:18:25 +1200 From: Joe Abley <jabley@clear.co.nz> To: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> Cc: rkw@dataplex.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jabley@clear.co.nz Subject: Re: Adding desktop support Message-ID: <19990430111825.K98083@clear.co.nz> In-Reply-To: <199904291312.JAA20991@lakes.dignus.com>; from Thomas David Rivers on Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 09:12:04AM -0400 References: <l03130302b34df6008389@[216.140.184.150]> <199904291312.JAA20991@lakes.dignus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 09:12:04AM -0400, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > > > > At 5:57 AM -0500 4/29/99, 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? > > > > I think that you miss the hierarchy of "defaults". > > > > If the USER has specified the icon for the entity, use his, > > > > else if the AUTHOR provided an icon, use it, > > > > else if the USER gave a default to the window manager, ... > > > > else if the WM-AUTHOR, ... > > > > else use a totally generic icon. > > And - my point - which you really made - is that all of the > alternatives can't go in the executable, or you begin to have > many copies of the executable, or one executable with large > repository & information for each user that may run it... both > of which can be quite a nightmare. I don't think this is contentious at all. With reference to Thomas' e-mail above, the idea is to put the author- rovided icon in the binary. This is the one place this icon can live where it will not be displaced by file copies, renames, etc. Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990430111825.K98083>