On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 05:16:12PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 16:59 +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> > * There is a little patch for the .desktop file in patches/.  How
> > can I now also use the patches from ../distcc/patches/ ?  Maybe I
> > should put the .desktop patch in ../distcc/patches/ as well, and
> > then use PATCHDIR=../distcc/patches/ in distcc-gtk/Makefile ?  
> 
> Just use a single patches directory (the one in distcc).

Will be done, if the patch still applies (I prefer dropping the .desktop
and icon file for the -gtk version, see below).  

> > * I'm using a patch now, but this may become very dependant of
> > distcc versions (i.e. may have to be changed for each new version of
> > distcc).  Maybe I should just use sed "s/-gnome/-gtk/" ?
> 
> If the replacements are safe, yes, that'd be OK.  Just keep in mind to
> use the subst framework rather than sed (grep for SUBST_CLASSES in the
> existing packages for examples).

Ok.  That's what I meant, btw.  Just used the abbreviation "sed". :-)  

> > * As this is a GTK package, not a Gnome package, does it need an
> > icon and .desktop file at all??  If not, the package would consist
> > of only the binary, and all the previous problems are not applicable
> > anymore.  
> 
> Yes, it's worth to have the icon and .desktop file.  The application
> will then be visible in gnome/kde's menu.  (Or in other wm's, when we
> implement the required functionality.)

The Gnome people would probably prefer distcc-gnome, the package I'm
creating right now, using ./configure --with-gnome (instead of
--with-gtk).  It has identical functionality but uses some different
libraries (libgnome, libgnomeui and pango, ontop of gtk+).  

If the -gtk package would keep the icon and .desktop file, I'd prefer
making them CONFLICTing.  

GH

-- 
:wq