Mime Icons and weak aliases (was Re: Theme meme)
jrb at redhat.com
Fri Jun 27 06:31:55 EEST 2003
Thomas Leonard <tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 10:09:38AM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 06:16, Thomas Leonard wrote:
> > > Is ~/.icons replacing ~/.themes, or the other way round? Will ~/.icons
> > > contain GTK themes in the future?
> > The reason that /usr/share/icons/ThemeName is not
> > /usr/share/themes/ThemeName/icons is basically legacy. KDE was already
> > using /usr/share/icons/ThemeName, and it didn't seem worth changing.
> > (Not everybody agrees with this, but I suspect a change is unlikely
> > at this point.)
> > Certainly ~/.icons will *not* replace ~/.themes for GTK+ themes.
> This seems a bit problematic for 'metathemes', then, if there's no plan
> to migrate everything one way or the other. Given that the MIME stuff
> doesn't have any legacy issues to worry about, I'm just trying to decide
> which system is preferred for new themes. Perhaps the icon spec could
> mention something about this?
I completely agree. I would like to see a move to
~/.themes/ThemeName/icons in the long run. We should think about a
migration path, as well as convincing the icon-spec people to move this
> Also, there needs to be a way to specify what the current theme actually
> is (we should allow for using one theme for application icons and another
> for MIME types, but whatever themes are chosen, they should apply to all
> programs regardless of desktop).
The way GNOME works is that it sets theme parts individually. There is
no global metatheme setting. It seems to work alright.
More information about the xdg