[Fedora-packaging] Re: iconcache, v0.5

[Axel Thimm]

On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 06:49:46AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 10:13:34AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >>Looks like Core folks won't settle for anything in between status-quo 
> >>and 100% fix (no in-between-compromising like using xdg-utils), so let's 
> >>give it a shot.
> >
> >What is the 100% fix?
> 
> 100% fix is loosely defined as satisfying the motivations/criteria 
> outlined in the latest version of the proposal.

Yes, but how would that work technically? Would an equivalent of
gtk-update-icon-cache be run on a directory upon first access to a
file within a folder with an aged index.theme? That would the only
sensible "100% fix" sound like.

> Note, however, that 100% fix is outside the scope of packaging 
> guidelines.  One thing that needs fixing wrt guidelines, however, is to 
> not regenerate icon cache on every single package install, hence, why 
> this newest version of the proposal drops the use of 
> gtk-update-icon-cache in %post/%postun.  On this, everyone from Core 
> agrees (including Matthias, gtk maintainer).

And what about the vaccuum that this leaves behind? A non-updated gtk
cache mechanism that cannot share mmaped icons? I don't known how bad
that actually is, but why not wait with changing the guidelines until
any better mechanism is in place?

BTW

# time gtk-update-icon-cache; time ldconfig

real    0m0.003s
user    0m0.001s
sys     0m0.002s

real    0m0.274s
user    0m0.130s
sys     0m0.143s

-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20061222/78bf75d4/attachment.sig>