[arch-general] .desktop and install files in general & Eclipse package not complete?

[Marcel Korpel]

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia at archlinux.info> wrote:
> On 2014-05-06 08:45, Marcel Korpel wrote:
>> update-desktop-database -q
[…]
> Have you bothered finding out what that command actually does? Once you do,
> you'd see that it's useless in this case.

Ah, it's only necessary to update the MIME cache, so files with a
certain extension are automatically loaded within a certain
application? Sorry, I don't use a desktop environment, so I didn't
know what the behaviour was.

>> $ pacman -Qo gtk-update-icon-cache
>> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache is owned by gtk-update-icon-cache 2.24.23-1
>>
>> So shouldn't those packages with an icon theme depend on
>> gtk-update-icon-cache instead of just on hicolor-icon-theme?
> eclipse depends on gtk2, which depends on gtk-update-icon-cache, which
> depends on hicolor-icon-theme. The deps are already satisfied, which is why
> namcap didn't complain.

So, about eclipse: it isn't necessary, but in general: the Wiki should
say that gtk-update-icon-cache should be included as a dependency (if
it isn't satisfied by something else) instead of hicolor-icon-theme,
which doesn't provide gtk-update-icon-cache. Am I right?

>> Is the Eclipse package wrong or is the Wiki not complete (also note
>> that the recommended install file of gedit [4] isn't that complete: it
>> doesn't contain a call to gtk-update-icon-cache as it doesn't contain
>> a hicolor icon theme; perhaps we should look for another example)?
> If it doesn't install an icon, there's obviously no need to call
> gtk-update-icon-cache.

No, of course not, but the Wiki says: "The gedit package contains a
very generic install file". However, the gedit install file isn't as
generic as claimed: it isn't targeted at updating the icon cache.

Regards,
Marcel