Description of problem: The current desktop Categories field is set to "Application;Utility;". It is wrong, accordingly to the latest Freedesktop specification, available here: http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html For emulators, you should use a main category like Game or System, and an additional Category of Emulator. Thus for a system emulator like dosbox the proper categories field would be: Categories=System;Emulator; Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install dosbox 2. 3. Actual results: Desktop entry is under the Accessories menu Expected results: Desktop entry should be under the system menu Additional info:
I just watched the CVS and I have to report this bug has not been closed correctly. You changed the categories to: Categories=Application;System;Emulator; As you can read here: http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html Application is neither a Main Category nor an Additional Category. Just drop it and leave: Categories=System;Emulator; I also had a look at the spec file. You should also drop --add-category=X-Fedora from desktop-file-install. This requirement has been removed from the packaging guidelines some time ago. You should also add hicolor-icon-theme to Requires. This is an empty package owning the /usr/share/icons/hicolor dir hierarchy, sortoff like the filesystem package but then for icons. Note that all packages which have an icon should Require this to ensure proper icon dir ownership.
I wonder if Applications really should be removed: /usr/share/applications $ grep Categories= * | grep Application | wc 125 125 9772 /usr/share/applications $ ls *desktop | wc 176 176 4463 So either a lot of dekstop entries are plain wrong or it is ok to do so. Which I think it is. As for --add-category=X-Fedora and hicolor-icon-theme I tend to agree to change that.
(In reply to comment #2) > So either a lot of dekstop entries are plain wrong or it is ok to do so. Which I > think it is. The former. But if you don't agree with me, please discuss this in the maintainers list. Andrea.
I am not saying I disagree with you. I am happy that you pointed me to it. I just wonder if not bugs should be filled against all packages that do this. I at least missed that Applications should be dropped and I am quiet sure that it once was the 'right' way to do this.