WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback  (Read 1318 times)

Offline curaga

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7856
Re: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2012, 08:55:37 AM »
AFAIK you can't rely on JWM's fallback being there for other WMs such as IceWM. The only standard really is when the app itself specifies an icon.
The only barriers that can stop you are the ones you create yourself.

Offline Jason W

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7126
Re: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback
« Reply #16 on: April 13, 2012, 05:32:50 PM »
Here is what I found comparing jwm, icewm, LXDE2, and fluxbox.

Icewm, fluxbox, and LXDE2 all recognize and use the app's internal icon spec for the titlebar icon.  None of them fall back to a /usr/local/share/pixmaps icon, but LXDE2 does use the Icon= field in the .desktop files to make a menu icon.  So in LXDE2 a menu icon is there as long as Icon= is specified and valid in the .desktop file.  So you can have a generic title bar icon but a specified menu icon in LXDE2.

Jwm does not use the app's internal icon spec, and instead relies totally on a /usr/local/share/pixmaps icon that is of the same name as the executable.  And it does not appear to do that reliably, since links2.scm and frozen-bubble.scm do not show a title bar icon at all no matter how the files are named, though both of those apps by default show a title bar icon in the other WM's and DE.  CORRECTION:  Jwm does seem to obey the icon spec in some apps when there is no pixmaps icon, but there is still some hit or miss.

So my conclusion is that the effort is not worth the result to further pursue renaming and restructuring extensions to only benefit jwm.  It would be different if it was also fixing a same problem in all the freedesktop DE's.  But they don't have that problem, they obey the app's standard icon spec.  Also, it is not just our build as I tested Debian's jwm and saw the exact same behavior.

« Last Edit: April 13, 2012, 06:01:27 PM by Jason W »

Offline SamK

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
Re: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2012, 12:01:55 AM »
So my conclusion is...
Just trying to clarify my understanding here...
In cases where the generic "X" icon is obtained, which is the preferred route?
  • No report is required. No fix will be attempted. In all cases the "X" icon is acceptable
    or
  • Report mismatches in executable and icon names.  A fix will be attempted.  If I understand correctly, this might work in some cases


Edited to ask the question more clearly
« Last Edit: April 14, 2012, 02:31:21 AM by SamK »

Offline Jason W

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7126
Re: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback
« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2012, 04:37:51 AM »
#1

The bug is in how jwm deals or not deals with icons, so it would be much better if jwm was fixed rather than to have to adjust every app to attempt to make an icon show for jwm.   And since it is not specific to our build of jwm, the jwm project would be the place to file a bug. 

But I did notice that a menu icon can be shown if the lines in /usr/local/tce.jwm went from:

<Program label="links">exec /usr/local/bin/links -g</Program>

to this:

<Program icon="links.png" label="links">exec /usr/local/bin/links -g</Program>

If the icon is specified but no icon is there, it works but simply does not display an icon.  I am not big on icons, so I am good with the current jwm menu setup.  But we just have to live with the title bar having or not having an icon, it is not worth the investment in time nor the imposing of rules in extension naming to try to accommodate jwm's behavior in the title bar icon handling.

Offline Jason W

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7126
Re: Links2 scm Bugs Feedback
« Reply #19 on: April 14, 2012, 05:46:23 PM »
One last thought, for the apps that do not display a title bar icon in the other window managers or desktop environments, then that should be reported to the upstream authors of the app itself.   That is, after their mailing list history has been searched to make sure that having no icon was not a conscious decision on the part of the project, especially the smaller apps that may rather not have the extra code and size.

Sam, I appreciate the time you are spending in testing the scm apps, and I hope it continues, though I feel this particular title bar icon issue is out of our hands.