Subject: Re: distcc-gtk (now depending on the original distcc)
To: None <>
From: Julio M. Merino Vidal <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/14/2005 17:35:16
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 17:24 +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 05:16:12PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:

> > Yes, it's worth to have the icon and .desktop file.  The application
> > will then be visible in gnome/kde's menu.  (Or in other wm's, when we
> > implement the required functionality.)
> The Gnome people would probably prefer distcc-gnome, the package I'm
> creating right now, using ./configure --with-gnome (instead of
> --with-gtk).  It has identical functionality but uses some different
> libraries (libgnome, libgnomeui and pango, ontop of gtk+).  
> If the -gtk package would keep the icon and .desktop file, I'd prefer
> making them CONFLICTing.  

Hmm... you'd also rename the .desktop file and the icon.  There should
be no problem in doing this, aside some more work ;)

The thing is that we will add a framework to pkgsrc to generate menus
for whichever window manager you have installed.  So, if someone chooses
distcc-gtk, he will want to see it in the menu (be it fluxbox, wmaker or
whatever); hence, the need for it.  (Or for example, if you are a KDE
user, you'll probably prefer distcc-gtk over distcc-gnome, and you'll
want your application to appear in the menu.)

Julio M. Merino Vidal <>
The NetBSD Project -