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

[Jesse Keating]

On Friday 22 December 2006 09:22, Rex Dieter wrote:
> imo, ldconfig example isn't a good one, but I get your point.
> Difference being here, messing with ldconfig can horribly break things.
>   A stale iconcache doesn't break anything, at worst only affects app
> startup time (a little).

Ah!  I missed this point.  If the above statement is true, I'm all for it.  I 
had thought we were going down the road of making a rule that would leave the 
cache unupdated period, and Some Other Process As Of Yet Unwritten would have 
to clean up behind us.  If this happens already, and all the end user sees is 
a slight delay, I'm for it.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- 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/babd481f/attachment.sig>