Current desktop detection / app access - take 2.
elanthis at awesomeplay.com
Mon May 17 19:41:19 EEST 2004
On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 12:23, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Monday 17 of May 2004 18:01, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le lun 17/05/2004 Ã 17:55, Sean Middleditch a Ã©crit :
> > > On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 11:31, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > > > /usr/bin/desktop-launchers an adequate place to standardise on ?
> > >
> > > /usr/libexec makes more sense. The files in desktop-launchers are not
> > > meant to be directly executed by users, and libexec is the place for
> > > those kinds of executables.
> > Keep in mind that /usr/libexec is not LSB compliant and is supposed to
> > be /usr/lib on LSB compliant systems..
> IMHO it'd make more sense to use desktop-launcher-$desktop (located anywhere
> in $PATH) instead of /usr/bin/desktop-launchers/$desktop (or whichever
> location you'd want). That way it'd be possible to do e.g. user install
> somewhere, with one specific location harcoded the functionality would be
> lost. User install of whole KDE may seem strange, but in fact I did it once
> (at school, in order to avoid using the CDE thing). And actually, this makes
> sense even now, as I have stable and development versions of KDE in different
Good point. Many users do the same with GNOME using garnome, jhbuild,
or one of the other build scripts/tools.
Sean Middleditch <elanthis at awesomeplay.com>
AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.
More information about the xdg