On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <[email protected]> wrote: > In practice this means that application should ship the .desktop file > and the icon in the main arch:any package where the main executable > is.
Sometimes the software is split into several packages and the meta package that would be used in CLI case doesn't contain a desktop file. For example, USC advertise "eclipse-platform" as "Eclipse" while people would use "s a-g i eclipse" https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/eclipse-platform/ I'm not sure whether USC install suggests packages. If it installs suggests package then there is no problem with "Eclipse" since there is some sort of circular dependency. > It should not, ship extra/pointless .desktop files, or mark them to be > ignored by USC archive-scanner. Do you think "Browse C: Drive" is pointless for Wine? https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/wine1.4/ Or "IBus Hangul Preferences" is pointless for Hangul engine of IBus? https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/ibus-hangul/ Extra .desktop files is due to sometimes DE specific .desktop files are used? As this the case for Synaptics. How to "mark them to be ignored by USC archive-scanner", is it documented? I hope such information available nicely in http://developer.ubuntu.com/ while I understand such information can also be figured by checking archive-scanner's source code :) > The conf file in the scanner is a point of last resort to fix up > things last minute. > Ideally updated / corrected desktop files should be in the packages themself. Sure. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
