Re: Default menu entries are deprecated, 2nd call.

[Josip Rodin <joy@gkvk.hr>]

On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 05:02:12PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > I question whether menu entries for shells are a useful thing to have.
> > > Does anyone actually use these?
> > 
> > People probably use the XShells, and indeed an x-terminal-emulator is a
> > prerequisite for the shells to be listed, but I can still see how someone
> > would want to have each shell listed, otherwise there's not much point to
> > the whole Shells subsection. While that subsection exists, each of those
> > should be in their own package, like e.g. zsh has its one.
> 
> I guess that I question the utility of the Shells subsection, then. :-)
> Someone who is interested in trying out different shells would certainly be
> comfortable typing them at the command line rather than selecting from a
> menu.

Well, some people like graphical interfaces over anything typing-related.

Note also that pdmenu exists.

I don't have a problem with any number of shells in the menus, because
they're in a separate subsection. If they were e.g. littering Apps/Tools,
then I'd be annoyed.

> > > Same here...isn't gpm meant to run as a daemon?
> > 
> > See /usr/share/menu/default/gpm -- the menu entry calls gpmconfig, which
> > is (vaguely) useful.
> 
> Vaguely, indeed...console jockeys probably prefer to run this from the
> command line as well.

Again, for pdmenu users it's useful...

> > > > hello
> > > 
> > > I don't think anyone will miss this one.
> > 
> > Agreed! :)
> 
> Though, now that I think about it, hello is meant to serve as a packaging
> example, and so this might be useful in that context.  I retract my comment
> above; I think that a menu entry should be added to the hello package.

Ah, you're right.

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.