[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ScriptletSnippets: desktop-database,mimeinfo



On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 15:14 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Do shared-mime-info and desktop-file-utils fall into the same category
> > or does some functionality of programs fail to work if
> > desktop-file-utils and shared-mime-info aren't run?
> 
> The latter.
> 
> > Your post makes me think that some Core GNOME applications (nautilus?
> > gnome-panel? gnome-vfs?) make use of the data generated by
> > desktop-file-utils and shared-mime-info but nothing else.  Is that true
> > or just a guess?
> 
> Gnome in general, yes.  That's why I'm arguing it should be the GNOME 
> libs/core bits that should depend on these, not (all) individual apps.
> 
If I'm reading your responses correctly, shared-mime-info and
desktop-file-utils must be run in order for Core Gnome to function
correctly.  However, the application itself can run under KDE or another
environment with no errors or loss of functionality.

I don't see a problem with changing the shared-mime-info section if
that's the case. (shared-mime-info's dependencies percolate through to
libgnome which should be required by anything depending on it and it
does have a scriptlet to update on install.)  

dekstop-file-utils doesn't seem to have either a dependency into the
Core of Gnome or a scriptlet to care for the case where it is installed
later so even though this seems like a valid concept, those issues
should be resolved first.

> > shared-mime-info seems to run itself on installation and update but
> > desktop-file-utils does not.  If desktop-file-utils is made optional for
> > the scriptlets, the desktop-file-utils Core package should run itself on
> > install. 
> 
> I'm not arguing that running them should be optional, only that the 
> additional dependancies for them not be added/Required.
> 
This is what I mean:  No Requires line.  Scriptlet contains a call to
the mime/desktop-file utility that does not fail if they are not
available on install/uninstall.  I assume we're on the same page but
stumbling over my imprecise wording?

> > (Hmm.. gtk2 doesn't run gtk-update-icon-cache on install... is
> > this a packaging bug? 
> 
> IMO, yes.
> 
> >Or perhaps this bug would resolve it:
> >    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170335
> 
> Yes too.  (that's my bug).

I saw :-)  Thanks for adding the update to add a scriptlet as well.

-Toshio

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]