Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #76 from Paulo Andrade <paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andrade@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #72) > > (In reply to comment #63) > > Should I keep this chunk btw? Same issue as other review: > > ---%<--- > > %post > > /bin/touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || : > > > > %postun > > if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then > > /bin/touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null > > /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || : > > fi > > > > %posttrans > > /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || : > > ---%<--- > > because the icon is actually installed under %{_datadir}/pixmaps, or > > should the icon be moved elsewhere (under %{_datadir}/pixmaps). > > You don't need this for an icon installed in %{_datadir}/pixmaps. I don't > yet understand the relative merits of installing an icon in > %{_datadir}/pixmaps versus %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor. If somebody out there > knows, please share that information. I am about to upload it to git now. Only change was release bump and removal of that chunk. - Remove noop icon cache regeneration scriplets (#877651#72) - First Fedora 18 and Fedora 19 approved package I believe installing in %{_datadir}/pixmaps is kind of KISS, possibly with some extra runtime overhead, because there are way too many subdirectories under %{_datadir}/icons, for different themes, categories, resolutions, etc. Following some links, this should be the simplest usage http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/latest/ar01s07.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GajNenZ6nA&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review