1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
This is what Debian did and many people complain about this, cause they want |
5 |
to be able to use KDE native menu system. |
6 |
Answering your question 'Why should I modify every ebuild'. Not every, but |
7 |
only the ones which provide some apps with UI. Secondly you don't *have to*. |
8 |
If you want users of your app's to edit files themselves - fair enough. |
9 |
|
10 |
On Thursday 14 August 2003 13:56, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
11 |
> You don't. Read the part of my comment that I left in this message. |
12 |
> Rather than add OUR menu system to /usr/kde/3.1/share/applnk, we should |
13 |
> patch KDE/Gnome/*box/etc (actually quite simple) to use |
14 |
> /usr/share/gentoo-menu or wherever we decide the Gentoo menu should go. |
15 |
> This saves the problem of having to edit every ebuild right now to |
16 |
> implement this, allows for a "Gentoo Menu" support which can easily be |
17 |
> turned on or off via FEATURES, and gives us a single location for our |
18 |
> entire menu structure, rather than duplicating our parsed menus all over |
19 |
> the filesystem. After all, if I have Gnome, KDE, WindowMaker, |
20 |
> AfterStep, and Fluxbox installed, the current proposal would have to |
21 |
> create 5 separate menus and maintain them to keep everything accurate. |
22 |
> Under my proposal, it would only have to maintain ONE and all 5 window |
23 |
> managers would use it. At this point you can use ANY version of ANY |
24 |
> spec we wish to support, and we don't have to wait on anyone else to |
25 |
> support it. |
26 |
|
27 |
- -- |
28 |
Let the Force be with us! |
29 |
Sergey Kuleshov |
30 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
31 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) |
32 |
|
33 |
iD8DBQE/O3JabYNN+aDJgscRAuMpAKDDKi1s+sSiby1IOnVpk4VX6tOKsACgssPV |
34 |
YgJgLHkDGxbIrgTQSijzPZ0= |
35 |
=6H43 |
36 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |