On 01.12.2007 22:05, Steven Edwards wrote:
I think teaching them about .lnk files is a better solution. It should not be
to hard to have a mime type of *.lnk that invokes Wine and passes the
shortcut to the link processor. Really all GNOME KDE need to do
with *.lnk files is have the ability
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Steven Edwards wrote:
[...]
What this means is that on logon or logoff the WM would call our
function and generate these fake Shortcuts for the *.lnk files by
running a copy of winepath after calling the Wine shelllink processor.
The results of winepath would translate
On Dec 2, 2007 9:16 AM, Francois Gouget [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How does Gnome/KDE know which WINEPREFIX to use for foo.lnk? Why should
it be '~/.wine' rather than '~/.wine-steam', '~/.wine-office' or
something else?
Maybe rather than storying the information in memory and creating it
at DE
On Nov 30, 2007 3:50 PM, Frank Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30.11.2007 18:50, Dimi Paun wrote:
I guess the preferred solution would be to teach GNOME KDE
about .lnk files.
Or write .desktop files to the Desktop dir.
I agree with Juan having multiple Desktop directories does not
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Steven Edwards wrote:
[...]
I think teaching them about .lnk files is a better solution. It should not be
to hard to have a mime type of *.lnk that invokes Wine and passes the
shortcut to the link processor. Really all GNOME KDE need to do
with *.lnk files is have the
On Dec 1, 2007 8:08 PM, Francois Gouget [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great. Now KDE and Gnome will have a PE loader and windows resource
parser. Plus when the .lnk points to a document they may have to load
the Windows registry to see what icon Windows associated with that
document, especially if
I'm not sure we want to handle the desktop directory the same way. It's
really a special case because applications often put their 'icons' on
the desktop. So if the Windows desktop is just a symbolic link to the
Unix one, the user will end up with a lot of 'xxx.lnk' files on his
desktop. In
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 18:45 +0100, Francois Gouget wrote:
That's ok only because you don't care about the Windows desktop
shortcuts...
I guess the preferred solution would be to teach GNOME KDE
about .lnk files.
--
Dimi Paun [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lattica, Inc.
On Friday 30 November 2007 03:35:14 am Francois Gouget wrote:
I'm not sure we want to handle the desktop directory the same way. It's
really a special case because applications often put their 'icons' on
the desktop. So if the Windows desktop is just a symbolic link to the
Unix one, the user
On 30.11.2007 18:50, Dimi Paun wrote:
I guess the preferred solution would be to teach GNOME KDE
about .lnk files.
Or write .desktop files to the Desktop dir.
-f.r.
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Juan Lang wrote:
[...]
While this is annoying, I find it confusing to go to the Desktop
directory and not find the files on my desktop there. I prefer having
the two desktops the same, and just delete the .lnk files myself.
That's ok only because you don't care about the
Francois Gouget [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
[...]
Also these variables should take priority over the default heuristics,
and you most likely want to handle the desktop dir the same way.
I'm not sure we want to handle the desktop directory the
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
[...]
Also these variables should take priority over the default heuristics,
and you most likely want to handle the desktop dir the same way.
I'm not sure we want to handle the desktop directory the same way. It's
really a special case because
That's ok only because you don't care about the Windows desktop
shortcuts...
Right, I know. My point is, there's no one-size-fits-all policy
that's clearly better than any other, at least that I've seen.
--Juan
On Nov 26, 2007 4:49 PM, Vijay Kiran Kamuju [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Lei,
I think a new file for user dir look up in the shell32 is of no use.
Rather than we can add it to the xdg.c and xdg.h, as it contains the
generic xdg code for shell32.
Its like having all xdg specific code at one
Lei Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was not sure if was alright to mix code with different licenses in
the same file. I looked around and found that
include/wine/wined3d_gl.h has both LGPL Wine code as well as MIT
licensed code from the Mesa project. Based on that, I guess it's ok to
do,
Hi Lei,
I think a new file for user dir look up in the shell32 is of no use.
Rather than we can add it to the xdg.c and xdg.h, as it contains the
generic xdg code for shell32.
Its like having all xdg specific code at one place.
This is my personal opinion about those patches.
Thanks,
VJ
17 matches
Mail list logo
