On 02/14/2014 02:05 PM, Darrell Anderson wrote: > I moved the icons in question because there were no icons > populating the former kcontrol protocols module and the help > handbook table of contents. > > We have discussed this issue before. The agreed preferred solution > is remove the duplicate icons from the sources. Fiddling around in > the build scripts is always a jerk-round solution. For example, the > amarok sources is the correct location for amarok icons, not > tdelibs, tdebase, tdeaddons, or where ever. > > The icons should not be deleted blindly. In a previous discussion I > mentioned the tdeaddon icons for kbabel were better because they > are more global in appearance while the icons in tdesdk are U.S.- > centric. In that case, move the tdeaddon kbabel icons and overwrite > the tdesdk kbabel icons. > > Darrell No complaints about any of that. The removals I have are the result of those discussions over the past 3 years. That's why I keep the tdeaddons kbabel and delete the tdesdk kbabel icons. The only concern this exercise raised for me is the preference I currently give to the protocol files from tde-snv over those from tdesdk. I think the correct approach would be to keep the tdesdk verisons of the protocols and remove the conflicting protocols from tde-svn. However, if I recall correctly, there was the suggestion that the tde-svn protocol files were newer than those from tdesdk and contained more translations. The concern with Amarok icons I have is -- they do not conflict with anything as long as they are in /opt/trinity/share/apps/amarok/icons. Therefore, they should be left there. If those icons do conflict with some other Debian/Ubuntu non-tde package -- then fix that package and don't mess with the TDE tree. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.