On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:04:18 +0900, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:20:07 + Till Varoquaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]
babbled:
I was reading freedesktop's various standards. I know there is a
choice not to use .desktop files since they are heavy to
+On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:20:07 + Till Varoquaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]
babbled:
I was reading freedesktop's various standards. I know there is a
choice not to use .desktop files since they are heavy to parse and so
on. I fully understand your choice and respect. However since
My point was also that freedesktop is moving towards providing
standards for an incresing number of things. .desktop files are going
to be used in other areas than just menues (like associating
run-actions to mime-types etc...) and while in the past ignoring came
at really minor cost (and
I was reading freedesktop's various standards. I know there is a
choice not to use .desktop files since they are heavy to parse and so
on. I fully understand your choice and respect. However since
freedesktops standards and more and more based upon .desktop files xml
and so one I am warry that efl
What do you mean by incompatible with other apps?
Can you not launch gnome/kde applications from enlightenment? Can you not
run EFL apps when running gnome or KDE?
The .desktop files just describe how the application should be launched
and how it should appear in the menus. It makes vendors
What do you mean by incompatible with other apps?
Can you not launch gnome/kde applications from enlightenment? Can you
not run EFL apps when running gnome or KDE?
The issue isn't the apps, but the launcher menus and such; the things
that FDO are trying to standardise...
The point is that
