Hi,
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:56:50PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 31.05.2012 21:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> > In any case the idea is to collect issues of broken mime support where
> > maintainers are unable / not willing to respect Debian policy 9.7.
> > Adding more entries is simple: Ju
On 31.05.2012 21:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
> In any case the idea is to collect issues of broken mime support where
> maintainers are unable / not willing to respect Debian policy 9.7.
> Adding more entries is simple: Just add the according mime file as
> .mime and add to "Enhances" in debian/con
Hi,
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 03:16:08PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm also not seeing GNOME applications as file type handlers in
> Akregator (KDE application). So I'm not sure this is even 'just' a
> problem for text-mode applications.
I have no idea whether the solution proposed below could
On 2012-05-02, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm also not seeing GNOME applications as file type handlers in
> Akregator (KDE application). So I'm not sure this is even 'just' a
> problem for text-mode applications.
I just tried to install 'gedit' to test it, and I can nicely now set
gedit as a handler
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 15:30 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just would like to warm up this thread a bit because I wonder if a
> solution would be found in time for Wheezy release. It seems nobody
> really seems to care about those suggested scripts and we are breaking a
> certain amount
Hi,
I just would like to warm up this thread a bit because I wonder if a
solution would be found in time for Wheezy release. It seems nobody
really seems to care about those suggested scripts and we are breaking a
certain amount of programs if mailcap entries are dropped without any
replacement.
Hello,
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> > as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> > existing solutions is .
>
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the current state of the
> distribution.
I'm afraid you are demonstrating you
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:27:40AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 19:11 +, brian m. carlson a écrit :
> > The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
> > fully-implemented solution.
>
> This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the curr
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 19:11 +, brian m. carlson a écrit :
> The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
> fully-implemented solution.
This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the current state of the
distribution.
> If you feel that it is obsolescent or
> ob
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 18:59 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:52:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > However, to prove your point you need to mention counter examples which
> > > are actually failing to use mime-support or are actually broken because
> > > of u
Hi Russ,
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 12:58:03PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Michael Biebl writes:
>
> > Show us where mime-support is a required part in policy and then we can
> > talk again.
>
> Policy 9.7 currently says that it's a bug to not support mime-support:
Many thanks for always bringin
On 02.02.2012 21:58, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Anyway, I think this discussion is painful and not likely to change
> anyone's mind, whereas the necessary glue between desktop files and
> mime-support looks like a couple of days of work. I'm currently playing
> with the idea of writing a spec and post
Michael Biebl writes:
> Show us where mime-support is a required part in policy and then we can
> talk again.
Policy 9.7 currently says that it's a bug to not support mime-support:
Packages which provide the ability to view/show/play, compose, edit or
print MIME types should register th
On 02.02.2012 20:11, brian m. carlson wrote:
> The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
...
> As a package maintainer, you're going to have to support some things you
> don't like. If you hate natural alignment and think sparc is awful, you
Show us where mime-su
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 06:08:33PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> > some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> > working machiner
On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:08:33 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> > some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> > working machinery, an
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally dec
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:52:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > However, to prove your point you need to mention counter examples which
> > are actually failing to use mime-support or are actually broken because
> > of using mime-support.
>
> Are you trying to troll, or do you actually not k
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> working machinery, and demand that bug submitters write the
> compatibility code.
The cor
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 15:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> > The "issue" here (or at least at the dawn
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:43 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > The policy
> > might claim it is the recommended way, but only a handful of programs,
> > such as mutt and lynx, actually make use of this information.
>
> Any reason you are leaving out those two programs (see, mc) which were
>
* Josselin Mouette [120202 16:23]:
> [the usual insults removed] The policy
> might claim it is the recommended way, but only a handful of programs,
> such as mutt and lynx, actually make use of this information.
Or programs like "see" or everything using it that wants to savely run
a program for
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:23:01PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> Claiming that the mime-support system actually works is stretching
> reality as much as a bone who just met Chuck Norris’ fist.
I fail to see a reason to fall back to polemics.
> The policy
> might claim it is the recommended
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 15:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> The "issue" here (or at least at the dawn of this thread) is that some
> package maintainers have chosen to break something that used to work.
Claiming that the mime-support system actually works is stretching
reality as much a
On 12-02-02 at 03:32pm, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 02:14 +, Wookey a écrit :
> > It wasn't at all obvious that the actual reason was a conspiracy to
> > remove mime file support from evince. Now that I know about it, I'm
> > not very impressed. Andreas has already e
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 02:14 +, Wookey a écrit :
> It wasn't at all obvious that the actual reason was a conspiracy to
> remove mime file support from evince. Now that I know about it, I'm
> not very impressed. Andreas has already expressed this annoyance so I
> won't say it again.
Being
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 02:52:22PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josselin did answer your question. To paraphrase my understanding of the
> answer: because he (they, probably, but he only spoke for himself) doesn't
> want to maintain those files because they duplicate information stored in
> anothe
+++ Andreas Tille [2012-02-01 09:56 +0100]:
> Hi Josselin,
>
> > To break such a chicken/egg circle, we
> > needed either to write the program ourselves, or to simply drop support
> > for the obsolete mime system.
>
> Somehow I missed an announcement that mime is obsolete and not supported
> in D
Andreas Tille writes:
> Could somebody please answer my implicite question why the mime files
> are removed before such a conversion tool exists and thus shamelessly
> are breaking applications that depend from it.
Josselin did answer your question. To paraphrase my understanding of the
answer:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 05:03:17PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Tools like mutt, which need the extended mailcap syntax, can certainly
> continue to ship a mime file.
>
> If a package ships both a desktop and a mime file, the conversion-tool
> could simply skip the automatic generation of the
Michael Biebl writes:
> On 01.02.2012 16:03, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> Assuming that Russ did not overlooked something this means that mailcap
>> entries can not generatet from desktop files. So the one-liners
>> mentioned by Josselin which might solve 50% of the task could not
>> easily enhanced
On 01.02.2012 16:03, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 01:51:17AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> The main place that mailcap is richer than the desktop file that I can see
>> is that mailcap allows you to express the exact command line (including
>> putting %s at different pla
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 01:51:17AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes:
> ...
I confirm that I agree that we should prevent duplication of data which
was stated in previous mails.
> The main place that mailcap is richer than the desktop file that I can see
> is that mailca
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le mercredi 01 février 2012 à 01:14 -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>> The description and nametemplate don't come from the same place. Those
>> come from /usr/share/mime/application/pdf.xml, and are the same for all
>> application/pdf entries.
> That, and also you hav
Le mercredi 01 février 2012 à 01:14 -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> The description and nametemplate don't come from the same place. Those
> come from /usr/share/mime/application/pdf.xml, and are the same for all
> application/pdf entries.
That, and also you have to take into account aliases (di
Andreas Tille writes:
> Well, from my perspective I was bored the first time when xpdf came up
> when I was expecting evince. After purging xpdf I learned that see does
> not find any pdf viewer. Sorry if I did not realised any discussion
> seven monthes ago noch any one-line helpers.
> So wer
Hi Josselin,
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:29:46AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> > as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> >
Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> existing solutions is .
The point is, no one will write such a program until we remove
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Andreas Tille (31/01/2012):
>> This is definitely not "wishlist" - but I do not like to play
>> severity-changing pingpong.
> Please avoid “To: debian-devel@” when you disagree with maintainers on
> individual bugs; thanks already.
Er, peer review seems like a primary
Andreas Tille (31/01/2012):
> This is definitely not "wishlist" - but I do not like to play
> severity-changing pingpong.
Please avoid “To: debian-devel@” when you disagree with maintainers on
individual bugs; thanks already.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
this problem concerns missing *.mime file which breaks other programs
like for instance see
$ see test.pdf
Error: no "view" mailcap rules found for type "application/pdf"
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 07:57:39PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> severity 658139 wishlist
> tags 658139 + wontfix
:-(
42 matches
Mail list logo
