> In general, I do not go out of my way looking for icons (and I try to
> keep them off the desktop). But generally, missing icons probably
> means you need to add (more) icon themes - not every theme seems to
> cover everything - or change to a different theme.
Since I'm not used to using XFCE in other distros, I'm not sure
whether it's icons ("View" DOES say "Icon View") or thumbnails that I
should be seeing.
> At some point in the past, I stopped getting icons _within_ evince
> (i.e. because a newer version used different icons). At that time,
> Fernando pointed my to lappearance as a way of changing the theme. I
> don't remember any more details about icons.
I haven't hit on any checkbox that makes them magically appear, which
suggests that's not the problem.
> > xfdesktop: Thumbnailer failed on calling GetFlavors
This seems to be sufficient cause for no thumbnails, but apparently it's
using a dbus service, so I thought I'd fix the permissions for the
/run/dbus from 770 to 755 first, see if that brought joy. No joy.
> The perms for the socket itself look correct to me, but are you
> starting the system dbus in your rewritten bootcripts ?
Yep, and the session-dbus at the top of .xinitrc.
> It looks to me as if 'startxfce4' will start things itself, but did
> you remember to _install_ ConsoleKit and upower ? The CanRestart and
> CanShutdown need upowerd to be installed (it gets invoked by
No, I didn't forget. I just decided neither of those, nor PAM, sudo,
nor policy kit. My overriding paradigm is "KISS", and those are an
awful lot of trouble for very little, if any, gain. I don't need some
package telling me it's OK to do what I'm going to do. I've got 3
fingers, and I don't use runlevel 5--the system is going down when I
want it to. I know the password for root. sudo is no substitute for
awareness, nor protection from stupidity. So I guess the "Mother May
I"'s are just ignorable.
One might have thought xfce might have looked for sudo, et al., during
configuration, and not built code trying to use non-existant programs.
> But overall, much of this stuff solves problems that BLFS builders do
> not often encounter. For many years I used to treat dbus as a
I'm not so sure they aren't worse than the problems!
> Mine is 755. Do you change umask anywhere? The scripts (mine) do not
> address permissions but do, of course, run as root during boot.
No, umask is 022 everywhere. When I discovered /run was ephemeral, and
dbus needed its directory recreated each time (which suggests /run is
the wrong place for it), I put it in sysconfig/createfiles, and gave it
770 on GP's.
> Complexity for all. That's the ticket.
My system, my rules. KISS!
--
Paul Rogers
[email protected]
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
--
http://www.fastmail.com - mmm... Fastmail...
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
