-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi, I've migrated my desktop from Gnome to Xfce for several reasons some days ago. But currently I've got an optical problem: The fedora-icon-theme and the echo-icon-theme seem to not provide an icon for the bluetooth- and pulseaudio-applet and the black default icon from the gnome-icon-theme looks absolutely ugly on Xfce. Am I the only one with this problem? - -- Regards,
Heiko Adams
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi Heiko,
On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:33:13 +0200 Heiko Adams wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi, I've migrated my desktop from Gnome to Xfce for several reasons some days ago. But currently I've got an optical problem: The fedora-icon-theme and the echo-icon-theme seem to not provide an icon for the bluetooth- and pulseaudio-applet and the black default icon from the gnome-icon-theme looks absolutely ugly on Xfce. Am I the only one with this problem?
I'd suggest you to not use pulseaudio-applet and use xfce mixer panel applet instead. As for bluetooth, for some or other reason I see blue echo-icon-theme's bluetooth icon... As for the black icons themselves they are symbolic icons and I still do not comprehend why are they preferred to usual ones even on GTK+2 and even with icon themes that do not provide symbolic icons themselves but have their full-colour equivalents... Is that bug or feature?
Cheers, Martin
Am Montag, den 08.08.2011, 23:33 +0200 schrieb Heiko Adams:
Hi, I've migrated my desktop from Gnome to Xfce for several reasons some days ago. But currently I've got an optical problem: The fedora-icon-theme and the echo-icon-theme seem to not provide an icon for the bluetooth- and pulseaudio-applet and the black default icon from the gnome-icon-theme looks absolutely ugly on Xfce. Am I the only one with this problem?
No you are not, I already complained about this in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678696 but there is no way to change it because the icon names are hardcoded to *-symbolic. IHMO this is fundamentally wrong as it only works with a single icon theme (gnome-icon-theme-symbolic) and does not conform to the xdg icon naming spec.
IHMO the right approach is 1. Have have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic use the normal names according to xdg icon naming standards 2. Have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic include gnome-icon-theme (done), so it prefers symbolic icons if available and falls back to the colored icons if symbolic icons are not available.
Regards, Christoph
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:17:38 +0200 Christoph Wickert wrote:
No you are not, I already complained about this in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678696 but there is no way to change it because the icon names are hardcoded to *-symbolic. IHMO this is fundamentally wrong as it only works with a single icon theme (gnome-icon-theme-symbolic) and does not conform to the xdg icon naming spec.
IHMO the right approach is 1. Have have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic use the normal names according to xdg icon naming standards 2. Have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic include gnome-icon-theme (done), so it prefers symbolic icons if available and falls back to the colored icons if symbolic icons are not available.
I think the same and have another reason for this: symbolic icons don't work the way they are supposed to with GTK+2, which means that with some [not uncommon] panel configurations it makes the icon practically invisible (e.g. if you use ibus input method and have the indicator displayed even if ibus is turned off, set panel colour to #BFBFBF and guess where the icon disappeared to...).
The question is, can we do anything with the situation? Patch icon themes to symlink symbolic icon filenames to "proper" icons included in the particular themes? Or mass file bugs about offending apps + gnome-icon-theme-symbolic?
Cheers, Martin
desktop@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org