Community Packages

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#20197 - [tuxcmd] No icon files are installed.

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by Mauro Santos (R00KIE) - Friday, 16 July 2010, 21:31 GMT
Last edited by Thomas Dziedzic (tomd123) - Friday, 16 July 2010, 22:21 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages
Status Closed
Assigned To Thomas Dziedzic (tomd123)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
No icon files are installed for tuxcmd.

The .desktop file needs to be patched so it contains the correct path for the icon file.

Attached is the patch for the .desktop file and a patch with the needed changes in the PKGBUILD.

Additional info:
* package version(s)
tuxcmd 0.6.70-2


Steps to reproduce:
pacman -S tuxcmd
pacman -Ql tuxcmd
No Icon files are listed.
   desktop_file.patch (0.4 KiB)
   PKGBUILD.patch (1.3 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Thomas Dziedzic (tomd123)
Friday, 16 July 2010, 22:21 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  fixed in pkgrel 3 also fixed up the prefix
Comment by Thomas Dziedzic (tomd123) - Friday, 16 July 2010, 21:45 GMT
I'll get right on this later today.
The PKGBUILD patch doesn't look quite right. Why remove the desktop file if you're going to patch it?
Anyways, thanks for your help :)
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Friday, 16 July 2010, 21:53 GMT
in fact the .desktop file is good. the only missing step is gtk-update-icon-cache -q -t -f usr/share/icons/hicolor in a .install
Comment by Mauro Santos (R00KIE) - Friday, 16 July 2010, 21:59 GMT
I have removed it from the list of sources because one .desktop file is installed with make install.
The old PKGBUILD just removed the whole ${pkgdir}/share directory (it should be ${pkgdir}/usr/share, I have corrected that) and afterwards installed the .desktop that comes with the PKGBUILD.

But I see your point, might as well provide an already patched file and replace the .desktop file that is installed with make install.
It's just that I'm not sure if in this case one should provide an already modified file or patch the one that is installed with make install.

Do it the way it is easier/better for you, you are the maintainer after all :)

Edit:
@Ionut Biru (wonder)
I didn't know about that one, there are a few other packages that could use that too.
When I spot one I'll test it and open the respective bug report.

Loading...