Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:15:53 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Montgomery-Smith <stephen@FreeBSD.org>, "lioux@FreeBSD.org" <lioux@FreeBSD.org>, Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu>, "freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>, Stephen, "demon@FreeBSD.org" <demon@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] A trivial change for DESKTOP_ENTRIES (take 2) Message-ID: <1310670953.23182.8.camel@hood.oook.cz> In-Reply-To: <201107141508.00682.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <201107121826.00020.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4E1F200D.1080002@missouri.edu> <1310666060.23182.1.camel@hood.oook.cz> <201107141508.00682.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-JL2cdFXlNRzf6+tjcYjP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jung-uk Kim p=ED=B9e v =E8t 14. 07. 2011 v 15:07 -0400:
> > > entry. I assume that the filename of the desktop entry is
> > > unimportant,
> >
> > The filename of desktop entry should be 100% inconsequential, and
> > our only care should be not have two ports installing same file.
>=20
> I believe the original intention was to use executable name to make=20
> desktop file, i.e., ${PREFIX}/bin/foo -> ${DESKTOPDIR}/foo.desktop. =20
Yes, and then came ports that needed to install several icons for same
executable, with different arguments. That was the reason for the
change.
> > > and is used only internally by Gnome or whatever.
> >
> > Sounds like a bug to me.
>=20
> Why do you think there is a bug? Basically, desktop files are=20
> meta-data for OSes which cannot handle extended attributes within a=20
No, .desktop files are just gnomeish equivalent of windows .pif files.
If they are used for something more significant, that's poor design by
my standards. That's why I wanted to get an opinion from gnome team
before taking any steps on this issue.
> file (e.g., resource fork of Mac), if I understand it correctly. I=20
> don't see anything wrong with GNOME referencing its window manager by=20
> desktop file name rather than by executable name with obscure=20
> options.
If that .desktop file was that critical for GNOME functionality, then
why it is not installed by vendor Makefiles and have to be hacked in in
the port??
> DESKTOP_ENTRIES are for *basic* stuff and bsd.port.mk clearly says=20
> complex desktop files cannot use it:
Yes but I see no need to abandon DESKTOP_ENTRIES for a simple port like
links..
--=20
--=20
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
"Ragtime" contained about forty-five seconds of Elizabeth McGovern
completely topless, but it got a "PG" in 1980. I have no idea why that
did, or "Titanic" got PG-13, yet "Merchant of Venice" gets tagged with
an "R". The MPAA is an intellectual and aesthetic embarassment. --
comment from IMDb board on US movie rating system
--=-JL2cdFXlNRzf6+tjcYjP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD)
iEYEABECAAYFAk4fQGgACgkQntdYP8FOsoI8RACglAYXuF/G1tampLFsjTLnuDwo
FjMAoLek1O0snpx4znydPikfZooF5+zg
=6zgM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-JL2cdFXlNRzf6+tjcYjP--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1310670953.23182.8.camel>