On 16-01-2013 21:34, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 05:55:19PM +0100, Gökçen Eraslan wrote: >> >> 32x32 is really small, indeed :) I'm not really familiar with Debian >> packaging so the decision is, of course, up to you. > > Regarding the resolution of the xpm the decision was taken by "somebody > else": > > http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu.html/ch3.html#s3.7 > > It also does not help to provide a larger icon - 32x32 ist just used. > >> I don't know how >> strict are these Debian Menu rules, but again I would rather install a >> single 64x64 file. > > This is for freedesktop.org icons (referenced in the desktop file) and > here this kind of restrictions do not apply. That's why I said: lets > leave the xpm (which is also not reasonable for freedesktop.org) be > restricted to 32x32 and use all the differently sized *.png files - > perhaps some users might like to create desktop objects and have > different screen resolutions for instance. >
Oh, I see. OK then, it's better to keep both 32x32 xpm and the png files. One thing that I don't understand, if we keep using Icon=king line in the desktop file, then 32x32 king.xpm file will be used as freedesktop icon, shouldn't we change icon line of desktop file to Icon=kingicon-orig ? Just like the easytag package. > Kind regards > Regards. > Andreas. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
