Bug 81778 – net-www/mozilla-firefox icons and .desktop cleanup

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED LATER

[Description Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2005-02-12 12:53:24 UTC]

The attached patch applied over current ebuild removes the need to provide the .desktop as a separate file, and installs the icons in the hicolor structure instead than the /usr/share/pixmaps directory.

It also doesn't need the .png file, as it uses the icons shipped with mozilla sources (two xpm and one png).

Installing icons in hicolor structure allows other icon themes to replace the icon with a styled one. For example, using Pastels Nuvola, I can use the firefox icon which is shipped with it instead of the default one.

The two icons in /usr/lib/MozillaFirefox/icons are no more intsalled by my patched ebuild because I couldn't find them in the output directory.

HTH, Diego

[Comment 1 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2005-02-12 12:54:06 UTC]

Created attachment 51077 [details, diff]
Patch over current ebuild.

[Comment 2 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2005-02-26 01:33:58 UTC]

Created attachment 52165 [details, diff]
Patch over 1.0.1 ebuild

This patch applies over 1.0.1 version of mozilla, and do just the same :)

[Comment 3 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2005-04-17 04:40:35 UTC]

This still applies cleanly over 1.0.3 ebuild.

[Comment 4 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2005-05-12 02:24:07 UTC]

Created attachment 58734 [details, diff]
Patch over 1.0.4

Updated patch that just fix the rejected hunk...

[Comment 5 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) 2005-10-07 12:50:32 UTC]

We should also make mozilla-firefox and mozilla-firefox-bin use the same names
for icons so that one can change from bin to sources and still have custom made
.desktop files working. The same problem is with thunderbird.

[Comment 6 TGL 2005-10-14 01:34:45 UTC]

(In reply to comment #5)
> We should also make mozilla-firefox and mozilla-firefox-bin use the same names
> for icons 

If that mean installing both icons with the same path and filename, i would say
it's a bad idea (file collision). The sources and -bin versions are not mutually
exclusive, and some people do install both (i do for instance).

[Comment 7 basic 2005-10-14 02:30:13 UTC]

(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > We should also make mozilla-firefox and mozilla-firefox-bin use the same names
> > for icons 
> 
> If that mean installing both icons with the same path and filename, i would say
> it's a bad idea (file collision). The sources and -bin versions are not mutually
> exclusive, and some people do install both (i do for instance).
The only way to have both is to create an ebuild for the icons and have both
moz-ff and moz-ff-bin depend on them. Not sure if that's a good idea though.

[Comment 8 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) 2005-10-14 07:23:08 UTC]

(In reply to comment #7)
> The only way to have both is to create an ebuild for the icons and have both
> moz-ff and moz-ff-bin depend on them. Not sure if that's a good idea though.
> 

That would be one way to do it. When installing Gentoo on new machines I usually
install the -bin version first and then continue to compiling the from sources
version some day. Because I use firefox and thunderbird quite often I like to
put it to the panel of the desktop environment I am using. This .desktop does
not get updated when switching from -bin to from sources. Of course I could make
a binary package compiled for all x86 machines but why not make the transition
easy to all users?

[Comment 9 Jory A. Pratt 2006-03-28 14:00:16 UTC]

After speaking with Diego, I am gonna close till later. Main priority right now is to get ff-1.5 to stable.