Le lundi 26 mars 2007, à 00:56 +0200, Vincent Untz a écrit :
Le samedi 24 mars 2007, à 11:53, Brian J. Tarricone a écrit :
I don't think it's needed to specify that field codes, quoting
escaping rules don't apply to TryExec: this part doesn't look
ambiguous to me in the spec. But if you
Le samedi 24 mars 2007, à 11:53, Brian J. Tarricone a écrit :
I don't think it's needed to specify that field codes, quoting
escaping rules don't apply to TryExec: this part doesn't look
ambiguous to me in the spec. But if you feel it's still ambiguous in
the spec, then we should fix in
Hi,
Le vendredi 23 mars 2007, à 10:31, Brian J. Tarricone a écrit :
Hi all,
We're revisiting our desktop menu implementation in Xfce, and I'm
looking at some old hacks I put into the old implementation to sanitise
the Exec and/or TryExec keys before using them.
Regarding the TryExec key,
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:48:47 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le samedi 24 mars 2007, à 10:21, Brian J. Tarricone a écrit :
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 12:18:21 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Would this definition fix all the issues?
Path to an executable file on disk used to determine if the
Hi all,
We're revisiting our desktop menu implementation in Xfce, and I'm
looking at some old hacks I put into the old implementation to sanitise
the Exec and/or TryExec keys before using them.
Regarding the TryExec key, what can I expect to find there? Are the
'field codes' allowed in the Exec
On 3/23/07, Brian J. Tarricone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
We're revisiting our desktop menu implementation in Xfce, and I'm
looking at some old hacks I put into the old implementation to sanitise
the Exec and/or TryExec keys before using them.
Regarding the TryExec key, what can I expect
