[blfs-dev] [..] r15309 - in trunk/BOOK: . introduction/welcome xfce/core

Armin K. krejzi at email.com
Sat Jan 24 11:33:32 PST 2015


On 24.1.2015 20:17, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> On 24-01-2015 15:37, Armin K. wrote:
>> On 24.1.2015 19:16, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>>> On 24-01-2015 13:59, Armin K. wrote:
>>>> On 01/24/2015 01:44 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We have the following in PCManFM:
>>>>>
>>>>> "sed -i ...: Fixes submenu for PCManFM entry."
>>>>>
>>>>> Without the sed, the application appears under the system sub-menu.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, as it was intended, because the spec says FileManager and
>>>> TerminalEmulator belong in the System section.
>>>>
>>>> See for yourself:
>>>>
>>>> http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/menu-spec-1.0.html#category-registry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Scroll down and find "FileManager" - it specifies System;FileTools,
>>>> where "FileTools" is category just above FileManager and specifies
>>>> "Utility or System", so reading further it comes to
>>>>
>>>> FileManager "System;Utility;" or "System;System;" - in both cases
>>>> "System" is in the first place and maintainers know that and have
>>>> specified it like that.
>>>
>>> And is clearly wrong. Some idiot wrote that because it came with the
>>> system, in Windows.
>>>
>>
>> So, according to you people who develop various desktop/window
>> manager/panels are idiots? Something's wrong there in my eyes.
>>
>>>> Same goes for TerminalEmulator (right below the FileManager) and I'm
>>>> speaking about LXTerminal now.
>>>
>>> Although I agree that it is a system tool, most, if not all devs, use it
>>> as file manager, to run the programs, to display images (feh, display),
>>> and many other uses. Thus for BLFS I still think it should be in
>>> Utilities.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, there's my answer. The keywords are "I think". Yet you took the
>> liberty several times to brag about my personal views for something
>> (which people agree with from time to time), yet you dare to enforce
>> your point of view to other people, even though a _standard_ which many
>> people have agreed on says otherwise? Such ignorance ...
>>
>>>> In the end, I come back to my original question, but a little rephrased:
>>>> Why did you change upstream default for something without an explanation
>>>> on _why_ it was done like we do for many seds in the book, as the
>>>> current explanation only tells what it does, not why it's needed (and it
>>>> isn't needed at all, I trust upstream maintainers know what they are
>>>> doing).
>>>
>>> http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/menu-spec-1.0.html#category-registry
>>>
>>>
>>> I completely disagree with this standard. File manager is what an
>>> administrator dislikes but the first thing a user searches.
>>>
>>
>> I disagree with many things, yet there's no need to be different when
>> there's no need to.
>>
>>> I don't remember any distribution that uses file manager in system.
>>>
>>> Same for terminal emulators.
>>>
>>> BLFS will be special, in this case.
>>>
>>
>> Haven't find a single distro that doesn't use upstream defaults.
>>
>> Debian and derivatives:
>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-xfce/desktop/trunk/thunar/debian/rules?view=markup
>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-xfce/desktop/trunk/thunar/debian/patches/
>>
>>
>> Fedora:
>>
>> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/Thunar.git/tree/
>>
>> Archlinux:
>>
>> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/thunar
>>
>>
>> If you are going to state something, at least find a way to cover your
>> claim. There is no single patch or sed or whatever that changes the
>> upstream default, enforced by a standard for Thunar desktop file.
>>
>>> Therefore, I'm not going to modify that, I disagree and have many other
>>> things to do.
>>>
>>> But I don't mind if somebody takes the trouble of undoing it.
>>>
>
> Just to inform that your email is blocked from now on.
>
> Remember where I asked you to go? Please stay there and don't come back.
>
> Bye.
>

Oh, what happened? A little baby didn't get what he wanted and now wants 
for the world to burn? Pathetic ...


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list