[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: unknown .kdelnk field
From:       David Faure <faure () alpha ! tat ! physik ! uni-tuebingen ! de>
Date:       1999-05-05 10:10:06
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 10:58:07AM +0200, Stefan Taferner wrote:
> On Tue, 04 May 1999, David Faure wrote:
> > On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 01:52:54PM -0400, pbrown@redhat.com wrote:
> > > On Tue, 4 May 1999, David Faure wrote:
> > > 
> > > > But it allows to enter several entries ("netscape", "Netscape",
> > > > "Communicator" (?), whatever), because it's handled like a mimetype.
> > > > I think this is wrong.
> > > > Let's rename this field to simply "Application", allow a single entry in
> > > > it, and we're done.
> > > > 
> > > > Did I miss something ?
> > > 
> > > I don't think so.  Makes sense to me.  However, Application is still a
> > > misleading name.  Let's call it AppBinary?
> > 
> > To me binary looks like 0 and 1 .... but you're the native speaker, not me ;)
> > 
> > Ok for AppBinary then ;)
> 
> How about "Exec" or "Execute" ?
> AppBinary is still not 100% clear to me.

No, Exec already exists and contains the command line.
Here we don't want the arguments. We just want the name of the application
"binary" (or shell!) .... ExecutablePattern ? ;) hmm...

-- 
David FAURE
david.faure@insa-lyon.fr, faure@kde.org
http://www.insa-lyon.fr/People/AEDI/dfaure/index.html 
KDE, Making The Future of Computing Available Today

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]