[Fedora-packaging] Re: rakarrack - alternative desktop categories

David Timms dtimms at iinet.net.au
Sun Oct 12 03:13:07 UTC 2008

David Timms wrote:

> Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>> 0.2.x is now in Planet CCRMA thanks to Arnaud from IRCAM. Great if you
>> can/want to migrate it to Fedora! 
> I did submit a package review that I think meets the Fedora guidelines:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455953
>> I would appreciate it if you could
>> keep the extra categories in the desktop file, they are used to classify
>> audio apps in an extra menu I added to Planet CCRMA (and rakarrack would
>> drop out of it if they were ommited). 
> The question you ask is a good one, and I understand where you are 
> coming from: {ccrma .spec}
> =====
> # desktop file categories
> BASE="X-Fedora Application AudioVideo"
> XTRA="X-Digital_Processing X-Jack"
> %{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications
> desktop-file-install --vendor fedora \
>   --dir %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications \
>   `for c in ${BASE} ${XTRA} ; do echo "--add-category $c " ; done` \
>   %{SOURCE1}
> =====
> As I understand it, a Fedora package can use only the categories present 
> in the freedesktop.org spec:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.desktop_file_creation
> http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html
> Can a package use it's own categories, or must they meet the standards ?
> If there will be many audio apps {aka ccrma} packages, it would be best 
> to have them grouped in the same menu; the AudioVideo menu on my machine 
> is already overflowing more than a screenful, so I think it would be 
> good if these audio {only} apps get their own menu ?
I have been making progress with the above review request, and am 
getting pretty close. It would be good if anyone having a definitive 
answer on this one could provide some guidance ;-)


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list