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

Rex Dieter rdieter at math.unl.edu
Fri Dec 22 13:37:19 UTC 2006

Axel Thimm wrote:
> 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.

Yeah, something like that.  The idea with the most momentum (among Core 
folks) involves some sort of filesystem-monitoring deamon of some sort 
to auto-update cache as needed.  My initially-proposed cron job which 
works (now) and is infinitely simpler, has pretty much been rejected.

Frankly, I don't care about the details of solving that: *it is not 
our(PC) problem* to address or solve.

>> 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?

Sigh, problem being, we've now been waiting 14+ months for this 
theoretical better mechanism.  You're willing to wait indefinitely?  Not 
me.  Further, I vehemently argue that problem is outside the scope of 
packaging guidelines.  Let's try to keep focus on what we (as packaging 
committee) *can* solve, please.

-- Rex

-- Rex

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list