Dear Mime Type Gurus

[Brian J. Tarricone]

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Andy Choens wrote:

> Well, then at the risk of asking a dumb question...how stable is 4.1.x? 
> If this is a fairly "stable" development tree, I might try to go and
> upgrade.  But, if  this is "normal" development tree I might not want to
> do this, since this computer is my main desktop.

i think we can make the claim that it's generally stable in that crashes 
should be very rare, and hopefully won't occur at all.  there are 
certainly problems, but i haven't seen any that have affected a large 
range of people that didn't get fixed within a day or two.

feature-wise, it's not really all that stable.  right now the icon 
theming for the panel and desktop menu is somewhat-broken, pending some 
decisions and work on how to best fix it.  i run CVS both at home and at 
work, and it's been fine with a few annoyances.  granted, i'm also a 
dev, so i can generally fix stuff on my own, so my opinion in that area 
is a bit biased.

also note that you don't have to upgrade your entire desktop to CVS.  
while it's not supported (not that CVS is really "supported" anyway), 
it's certainly possible to upgrade the foundation libraries to CVS, and, 
in your case, just xffm, and still run the 4.0.x panel and WM (etc.).  
the integration may be a little weird, but you can upgrade at your 
discretion, as long as libxfce4util, libxfce4mcs, libxfcegui4, and 
probably xfce-mcs-manager and xfce-mcs-plugins are the 
latest-and-greatest.

if you're installing from binary packages, just remember that you should 
remove the packages that you upgrade from source, just to be safe that 
no old libraries are floating around.

and also remember that if it breaks, you get to keep the pieces ^_~.

	-brian


> 
> Either way, xfce is going in the right directions.
> 
> --andy
> 
> On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 10:17, edscott wilson garcia wrote:
> 
> > El mié, 14-04-2004 a las 08:54, Andy Choens escribió:
> > > I need your help.  I'm in the process of trying to really tweak xffm,
> > > and I'm struggling.  So, I thought I would write you this little letter.
> > > 
> > > For starters, I like it when my xffm uses the correct icon for the
> > > correct file type.  Any OOo file, like foo.sxw shows as a plain file,
> > > not as a staroffice file.  This concernned me, so I dug around and
> > > found:  "/usr/share/xffm/pixmaps/gnome/mime.xml".  I assumed there was a
> > > problem with the mime typing.  I was wrong.  Here is an example:
> > > 
> > > <mime id="xf_vnd.sun.xml.writer"
> > > icon="gnome-application-vnd.sun.xml.writer.png"/>
> > > 
> > > I checked for spelling and I checked for the existence of the file being
> > > referenced.  Both check out.  So, I ask you.  Why, oh why does my
> > > foo.sxw have this dull white paper-looking icon and not something to do
> > > with swriter?
> > 
> > Because the mime stuff was just a bit broken in the 4.0.x branch. All
> > this has changed in the 4.1 (CVS HEAD). With 4.1 I have .sxw files and
> > icons are correct according to gnome theme. Unfortunately the change in
> > mime stuff for 4.1 involved a switch to freedesktop mime and adding I
> > don't know what feature or translation. Since features/translations
> > cannot be added to 4.0.x, the correct behaviour has not been backported.
> > But in view of the repeated comments on the subject, I am tempted to go
> > ahead with the backport anyway, although it would be for 4.0.6 since
> > 4.0.5 has already been frozen by Olivier. 
> > > 
> > > But, my troubles don't end there.  I also struggle assigning the correct
> > > application to the correct file-type.  So, I found,
> > > "~/.xfce4/xffm/applications.xml".  I thought this might be the answer to
> > > all my problems.  My problem is pretty simple.  Thanks to:
> > > 
> > > <extension id=".tar.gz" application="file-roller"/>
> > > 
> > > the file myfoo.tar.gz will open with file-roller.  But, if I have
> > > myfoo.1.0.1.tar.gz, it craps out and doesn't know what to do with it,
> > > unless I prod it to use file-roller.  Now, I am perfectly capable of
> > > telling xffm to use file-roller, but I'm a lazy sod and don't want to
> > > work anymore than necessary.  I tried to stick a "*" into the xml file,
> > > with no success.  Is something like a wild-card possible, and if so,
> > > what does it look like?
> > 
> > Same as above. Fixed in 4.1: just using .tar.gz association works, since
> > it will try .1.0.1.tar.gz, .0.1.tar.gz, .1.tar.gz and .tar.gz until it
> > gets a hit (with .tar.gz). Not yet backported to <= 4.0.5.
> > 
> > Edscott
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks in advance
> > > --andy
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Om Mani Padme Hume
> > >         --Traditional Tibetan Blessing
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Xfce mailing list
> > > Xfce at xfce.org
> > > http://lunar-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce
> > > http://www.xfce.org
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xfce mailing list
> > Xfce at xfce.org
> > http://lunar-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce
> > http://www.xfce.org
> 
> 
> 
> Om Mani Padme Hume
>         --Traditional Tibetan Blessing
>