On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2014-05-06 08:45, Marcel Korpel wrote: >> update-desktop-database -q […] > Have you bothered finding out what that command actually does? Once you do, > you'd see that it's useless in this case. Ah, it's only necessary to update the MIME cache, so files with a certain extension are automatically loaded within a certain application? Sorry, I don't use a desktop environment, so I didn't know what the behaviour was. >> $ pacman -Qo gtk-update-icon-cache >> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache is owned by gtk-update-icon-cache 2.24.23-1 >> >> So shouldn't those packages with an icon theme depend on >> gtk-update-icon-cache instead of just on hicolor-icon-theme? > eclipse depends on gtk2, which depends on gtk-update-icon-cache, which > depends on hicolor-icon-theme. The deps are already satisfied, which is why > namcap didn't complain. So, about eclipse: it isn't necessary, but in general: the Wiki should say that gtk-update-icon-cache should be included as a dependency (if it isn't satisfied by something else) instead of hicolor-icon-theme, which doesn't provide gtk-update-icon-cache. Am I right? >> Is the Eclipse package wrong or is the Wiki not complete (also note >> that the recommended install file of gedit [4] isn't that complete: it >> doesn't contain a call to gtk-update-icon-cache as it doesn't contain >> a hicolor icon theme; perhaps we should look for another example)? > If it doesn't install an icon, there's obviously no need to call > gtk-update-icon-cache. No, of course not, but the Wiki says: "The gedit package contains a very generic install file". However, the gedit install file isn't as generic as claimed: it isn't targeted at updating the icon cache. Regards, Marcel
