From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26898 invoked by uid 1002); 28 Aug 2003 14:35:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 13760 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2003 14:35:55 -0000 From: foser To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200308281600.13232.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <1062076911.3455.116.camel@rivendell> <200308281600.13232.pauldv@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1062081047.3455.132.camel@rivendell> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:30:48 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop X-Archives-Salt: a0e19978-cdaf-4e55-9044-5830d3e24751 X-Archives-Hash: 9789a5853b888a3c5edcc45935988d04 On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 16:00, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > The menu system is not about having the same menu in all windowmanagers as > much as it is about having every application added to the menu of whatever > windowmanager you are using. Independent of what kind of toolkit the > application uses. A vanilla useflag would function like currently the foreign > package flag does for the kdeadmin ebuild. That flag enables the compilation > of a package manager that is standard but currently does not work well with > gentoo (it being not an rpm based system). I know it isn't, but it's one of the uses. I was thinking when i wrote it i should've explicitly added that it wasn't all this is about, but thought it unneeded. Wrong again, it was just an example. I was later on hammering at the fact that the wm's better be adapted by us than us providing layers of stitchy support on distro level. > For the menu system it might be necessary to patch some windowmanagers to be > able to use our menu's while keeping some compatibility with a situation > where the menu manager is not installed. Those changes are normally small and > localised, but generally change some part of the plumbing of such a program > while keeping generally the same behaviour. If you want to hack with a > windowmanager yourself those changes might be confusing and hence the > "vanilla" flag Vanilla flag for what, if it's not good enough for everyone it shouldn't be needed. Although we are still talking details of 1 proposed project here with 1 possible implementation in mind. I don't think that is what this thread was meant to be about. > The idea is not to create some monstrous gentoo-specific monstrosity as redhat > does with kde. It is just small changes to make sure that everything "just > works". For example take a look to > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14872 > Which is an enhancement I wrote so that things like kmail gpg support is easy > to install, just as all kinds of IME's (for our asian friends) All interesting stuff i know about and i agree with it would be nice to have implemented. But i react to the initial mail here which implies much bigger changes. As said i'm not against patching up stuff a little when functional. > Gnome's configuration does not include a menu system with all installed X > applications I assume these 'X applications' you speak of don't even install desktop items at all. This could be easily fixed by providing current freedesktop spec following items. - foser -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list