FS#26882 - lxappearance-0.5.1-2 creates directory gtk-3.0 in $HOME instead of ~/.config

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by Das (DasFox) - Monday, 14 November 2011, 08:12 GMT
Last edited by Bartłomiej Piotrowski (Barthalion) - Saturday, 03 December 2011, 08:40 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages
Status Closed
Assigned To Bartłomiej Piotrowski (Barthalion)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description: lxappearance-0.5.1-2 creates directoty gtk-3.0 in $HOME instead of ~/.config/gtk-3.0


Additional info:
* package version(s)

lxappearance-0.5.1-2-i686

* config and/or log files etc.


Steps to reproduce:

When running lxappearance for the first time it's creates directory gtk-3.0 in $HOME instead of ~/.config

I've attached a patch that will fix this problem so I hope this can be merged for an update soon...


THANKS
   gtk3-patch (4.3 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Bartłomiej Piotrowski (Barthalion)
Saturday, 03 December 2011, 08:40 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  Added patch in lxappearance-0.5.1-3.
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Monday, 14 November 2011, 08:24 GMT
does upstream know about this? from where you got this patch?
Comment by Das (DasFox) - Wednesday, 16 November 2011, 02:36 GMT
I don't know if upstream knows anything.

I found it online somewhere, I forgot and there's this patch, might be the same one on this Arch forum post;

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=984056#p984056

The patch I used, I compiled it in Slackware against lxappearance and it works fine for me...


THANKS
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Thursday, 17 November 2011, 16:49 GMT
then it will die in here. let upstream know
Comment by Das (DasFox) - Thursday, 17 November 2011, 22:21 GMT
Upstream, you mean LXDE developers?

What is wrong with using Arch using the patch or creating one themselves?

Certainly a developer can tell what the patch is apply it and test it, or just make one themselves...

I thought Arch developers will patch an application if there's a problem and the source developers haven't gotten around to it...


THANKS
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Sunday, 20 November 2011, 13:58 GMT
yes, there is nothing wrong with creating a patch but we feel that is right thing to push upstream rather than having only for our-self.
Comment by Das (DasFox) - Monday, 21 November 2011, 01:40 GMT
I can understand if this was a kernel patch we were talking about, being reluctant to do it, but this is something really simply, so I was hoping that the Arch team would simply pick it up and patch it until the LXDE team gets around to it.

The LXDE team put this out over 4 months ago, this goes to show how slow this is going, so who knows if this is ever going to get a patch or we're going to have to wait for another release...

So I truly hope we don't have to wait any longer and the Arch team can simply patch it and put it out in the next week or two...


THANKS
Comment by Bartłomiej Piotrowski (Barthalion) - Saturday, 03 December 2011, 08:39 GMT
Well, it's upstream problem, but when I see speed of development in LXDE... Added patch to lxappearance 0.5.1-3.

Loading...