Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 208898
Review Request: bluez-gnome -- Bluetooth pairing and control applet
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:44 EST
Spec URL: http://david.woodhou.se/bluez-gnome.spec
SRPM URL: http://david.woodhou.se/bluez/bluez-gnome-0.5-2.src.rpm
Description: The bluez-gnome package contains Bluetooth helper applets and tools for the GNOME desktop environment.
W: bluez-gnome unversioned-explicit-obsoletes bluez-pin
E: bluez-gnome obsolete-not-provided bluez-pin
These are intentional. It obsoletes all versions of bluez-pin and does not provide compatible functionality. The new bluez-utils requires bluez-gnome _instead_ of bluez-pin.
W: bluez-gnome non-conffile-in-etc /etc/xdg/autostart/bt-applet.desktop
I think this is correct. All the other files in /etc/xdg/autostart are non-config files too.
Where should the bt-applet.desktop file go?
/etc/xdg/autostart seems to work for GNOME but not for KDE.
/usr/share/autostart seems to work for KDE but not for GNOME.
$ echo $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS
So when KDE doesn't find it in /etc/xdg/autostart, it's buggy?
It should go in /usr/share/gnome/autostart (just like the autostart files for
g-p-m, nm-applet and g-v-m) as I believe you _only_ want to start it
automatically when running a GNOME session. This is a GNOME specific directory
for things that should _only_ be started when starting a GNOME session.
If you want it to run for all XDG compliant desktops (which I don't think you
want to do as it's GNOME specific) look at the specifications mentioned in
Despite the silly name, I do want it to start in all sessions. My understanding
of the referenced specification was that I should therefore put the .desktop
file in /etc/xdg/autostart. Which didn't work for KDE -- even, iirc, when I
omitted the 'OnlyShownIn: GNOME;' line :)
Then I'd use /etc/xdg/autostart and file a bug to get KDE fixed.
do you know what the status of autostart compliance is in kde right now?
I wonder if this should be closed, based on what I see on my rawhide system:
[mclasen@localhost ~]$ rpm -q bluez-gnome
So was this package formally approved? Currently it's still blocking FC-NEW,
and there's no indication of approval in any of the comments.