On 27.01.2009 05:00, Scott Ritchie wrote:
One open question: what to do with Windows apps that don't put
themselves in Program Files, but rather put themselves at the top of the
start menu?
Desktop menu building could put both 'Program Files' and 'real
top-level' entries under the same Wine
Reece Dunn mscl...@googlemail.com writes:
I have noticed that when wine creates a menu item (that for example,
on Ubuntu gets put in the Applications Wine Programs menu), the
command that gets written uses 'wine' as the program to run. This
means that you need to have Wine in your PATH and
Reece Dunn wrote:
Along similar lines, building on what Owen said in the talk that if
all goes well Jane user will not notice that she is using Wine to run
her Windows software: why is there an entry in the Applications
section that says 'Wine' (and why does it have the folder icon and not
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Reece Dunn mscl...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have noticed that when wine creates a menu item (that for example,
on Ubuntu gets put in the Applications Wine Programs menu), the
command that gets written uses 'wine' as the program to run. This
means that
I have noticed that when wine creates a menu item (that for example,
on Ubuntu gets put in the Applications Wine Programs menu), the
command that gets written uses 'wine' as the program to run. This
means that you need to have Wine in your PATH and cannot use more than
one version of Wine.
On 25.01.2009 22:58, Owen Rudge wrote:
Windows software may be a better term than Wine. Program Files
wouldn't really make sense, since all the items in the Applications menu
are meant to be program files. On the issue of whether we should keep
the Programs subfolder, I guess you could
Frank Richter wrote:
Also, Windows and Linux desktops have a bit of different views on what
the desktop menu should contain: most of the time, the Windows start
menu contains one folder per application, with that folder containing
not only the application but also a link to the README or web
