Re: Panel item question
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 03:59:58PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote:
> > there's a "try-run" feature in the .desktop files,
> > we have some such .desktop files for rxvt and xterm for example.
>
> The "try-run" field of launchers does *not* affect their visibility.
On my system, if the TryExec field value is not found, the item is not
visible.
> > If the program isn't there, it doesn't show up in the menu, easy.
>
> When Ryan said something about the "panel item", I looked at that big
> button labeled "Netscape" which appears on the default panel. If
> we're talking about the menus, then, yes, fine, I agree with Ryan. If
> we're talking about launchers, then no, I don't think we need to have
> two by default (since one won't work unless you install a package that
> isn't on your CD).
>
> Anyway, I never use the Gnome menus -- I have them turned off and the
> Debian menus turned on. So I kinda forgot about them, which probably
> helped contribute to the confusion level of this discussion.
>
> Really, there seem to be two very closely related problems here: the
> behavior of the default launcher(s), and the behavior of the default
> menu item(s). Ryan's solution seems fine for the menu problems, but
> not for the launcher problems. But both problems really should be
> fixed.
I submitted a couple of patches:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=135992&repeatmerged=yes
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=135993&repeatmerged=yes
One addresses the Netscape item by changing the Exec field to 'netscape'
(its TryExec was already 'netscape'). If you don't have a 'netscape', you
won't see the item. :) The other adds a 'Mozilla Control' item to take the
place of what the prepatched Netscape item had launched. Realistically, I'm
not sure this is necessary since there are already 'Galeon' and 'Mozilla'
items, but I guess people might be accustomed to gnome-moz-remote.
FWIW, here's the spec for .desktop entries:
http://www.freedesktop.org/standards/desktop-entry-spec/desktop-entry-spec.html
Ryan
Reply to: