I got recently called out for using desktop-file-validate instead of desktop-file-install when the upstream .desktop file is correct, doesn't need to be changed, and make install already places it in the correct location.
Since the purpose of this guideline is to validate, I propose to amend the section of the packaging guidelines on desktop-file-install usage[1] as follows:
* Rename the sub-heading from "desktop-file-install" to ".desktop file installation and validation"
* Change the first sentence to:
<< It is not simply enough to just include the .desktop file in the package, one MUST run desktop-file-install OR desktop-file-validate in %install (and have BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils), to help ensure .desktop file safety and spec-compliance. desktop-file-install MUST be used if the package does not install the file or there are changes desired to the .desktop file (such as add/removing categories, etc). desktop-file-validate MAY be used instead if the .desktop file's content/location does not need modification. Here are some examples of usage:
* Add the following example:
<< desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/foo.desktop
Thoughts?
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-d559ee7363418a5840ce...
Christopher Aillon wrote:
- Add the following example:
<< desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/foo.desktop
Thoughts?
+1, could even go into %check section.
I *think* I had advocated the same change way been when, and the argument against it was (paraphrasing with my biased glasses on): "keep it simple, don't confuse folks with extraneous options and examples."
-- Rex
Christopher Aillon wrote:
I got recently called out for using desktop-file-validate instead of desktop-file-install when the upstream .desktop file is correct, doesn't need to be changed, and make install already places it in the correct location.
This all makes good sense; but what are the actual differences between -validate and -install ?
Does install call validate ?
On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 14:07 +1000, David Timms wrote:
Christopher Aillon wrote:
I got recently called out for using desktop-file-validate instead of desktop-file-install when the upstream .desktop file is correct, doesn't need to be changed, and make install already places it in the correct location.
This all makes good sense; but what are the actual differences between -validate and -install ?
Does install call validate ?
Install validates the file that gets installed, but additionally, it lets you make changes to the file before installing it, like adding/removing OnlyShowIn keys, or changing categories, etc.
On 04/18/2008 12:08 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
I got recently called out for using desktop-file-validate instead of desktop-file-install when the upstream .desktop file is correct, doesn't need to be changed, and make install already places it in the correct location.
Since the purpose of this guideline is to validate, I propose to amend the section of the packaging guidelines on desktop-file-install usage[1] as follows:
Rename the sub-heading from "desktop-file-install" to ".desktop file installation and validation"
Change the first sentence to:
<< It is not simply enough to just include the .desktop file in the package, one MUST run desktop-file-install OR desktop-file-validate in %install (and have BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils), to help ensure .desktop file safety and spec-compliance. desktop-file-install MUST be used if the package does not install the file or there are changes desired to the .desktop file (such as add/removing categories, etc). desktop-file-validate MAY be used instead if the .desktop file's content/location does not need modification. Here are some examples of usage:
- Add the following example:
<< desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/foo.desktop
Thoughts?
Any word on this? Can this be voted on?
Christopher Aillon wrote:
On 04/18/2008 12:08 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
I got recently called out for using desktop-file-validate instead of desktop-file-install when the upstream .desktop file is correct, doesn't need to be changed, and make install already places it in the correct location.
Since the purpose of this guideline is to validate, I propose to amend the section of the packaging guidelines on desktop-file-install usage[1] as follows:
Rename the sub-heading from "desktop-file-install" to ".desktop file installation and validation"
Change the first sentence to:
<< It is not simply enough to just include the .desktop file in the package, one MUST run desktop-file-install OR desktop-file-validate in %install (and have BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils), to help ensure .desktop file safety and spec-compliance. desktop-file-install MUST be used if the package does not install the file or there are changes desired to the .desktop file (such as add/removing categories, etc). desktop-file-validate MAY be used instead if the .desktop file's content/location does not need modification. Here are some examples of usage:
- Add the following example:
<< desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/foo.desktop
Thoughts?
Any word on this? Can this be voted on?
Looks good (and reasonable) to me.
Regards,
Hans
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Christopher Aillon -
Development discussions related to Fedora -
Hans de Goede -
Matthias Clasen -
Rex Dieter