[Fedora-packaging] Re: Re: iconcache scriptlets

Enrico Scholz enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de
Wed Dec 6 14:57:53 UTC 2006

rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) writes:

>>>>>> Why the 'touch' stuff?
>>>>> The fdo spec mandates the timestamp of the installed-to icon dir
>>>>> *must* be updated.
>>>> What is a 'fdo spec'?
>>> http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html#implementation_notes
>> Oh, I see. The 'touch' makes a differences when user installed a
>> 3rd party application with a 3rd party toolkit which is following
>> freedesktop.org iconcache-recommendations.
> Take 3rd party of it.  This includes *all* apps using *any* toolkit.

Does gtk1, QT or wxWindows implement the freedesktop icon caching?

>>> then the icondir timestamp will fail to be updated.
>> This would not make a difference: in both cases ('touch' and '--force')
>> the iconcache will be updated in the same manner during the installation
>> of 'gtk-update-icon-cache'.
> OK, I'll say it one more time: Lacking
> Requires(post): gtk2
> Requires(postun): gtk2
> *gtk2 may not be present at install-time*.  As such,
> gtk-update-icon-cache present in scriplets may not get run, thus, the
> icondir timestamp may not get updated.
> Am I missing something?

yes; the timestamp itself is important for gtk (and other toolkits
following the freedesktop recommendations) only. Not touching the
timestamp would cause only currently running 3rd party apps (using
such a toolkit) not to recognize the new icons.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list