Rex Dieter (rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > >But this doesn't 'solve' anything, or 'simiplify' anything - it just > >moves a touch into the shell script, and renames the command, and makes > >things slower. > > I'd bet the performance difference is not even measurable, so I don't > think it's worth arguing that. time to do touch && gtk-update-icon-cache, with cache warm, average, five runs: .166 time to do xdg-icon-resource..., with cache warm, average, five runs: .270 62% slower. It'd be even slower if I had KDE installed, from a quick glance over the script (or if I was running on a slower machine.) After all, it's a shell script that runs sed on the path to walk it itself; that *can't* be efficient. > >So, essentially, it boils down to an objection to the tool being named > >'gtk2-...'? > > Or, it seems to be, a reluctance to use or bias against > http://portland.freedesktop.org I'm against silly standards that make the system less efficient for no actual gain. Bill -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
