GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 791836
gtk-update-icon-cache is too concise
Last modified: 2018-04-15 00:14:27 UTC
Like this: > [root@ildar Vibrancy-Colors]# gtk-update-icon-cache -f . > gtk-update-icon-cache: The generated cache was invalid. > [root@ildar Vibrancy-Colors-Dark]# gtk-update-icon-cache -f . > gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully. The 1st case fails miserably with creating 500M garbage. It should at least report a little more. P.S. The core problem was - spaces in icon file names BTW.
So it is not "too concise", as you wrote in the ticket summary? Also, please always include version information in tickets.
> It should at least report a little more. You should at least suggest what more it should report...
Allrightie. A user did: > [root@localhost Vibrancy-Colors]# gtk-update-icon-cache -f . and he got: > gtk-update-icon-cache: The generated cache was invalid. + no cache file + 500M garbage. A user expects: 1. verbose explanation what gone wrong 2. possibly options for debugging/troubleshooting.
Can you be more specific about the 'garbage' ? What is it, do we leave a temp file behind ?
yep, `.icon-theme.cache` (starting with dot)
Where exactly (path)? Which size?
> $ cd `mktemp -d` > $ mkdir -p 16x16/actions > $ cp -a /usr/share/icons/HighContrast/index.theme . > $ cp /usr/share/icons/HighContrast/16x16/actions/action-unavailable.png 16x16/actions/'spaced icon.png' > $ gtk-update-icon-cache --include-image-data . > gtk-update-icon-cache: The generated cache was invalid. > $ ls -la > итого 12 > drwx------ 3 ildar ildar 100 дек 30 01:35 . > drwxrwx--T 26 root ildar 800 дек 30 01:33 .. > drwxr-xr-x 3 ildar ildar 60 дек 30 01:34 16x16 > -rw-r--r-- 1 ildar ildar 1184 дек 30 01:35 .icon-theme.cache > -rw-r--r-- 1 ildar ildar 5632 мар 27 2017 index.theme The size of `.icon-theme.cache` is bigger then the icon(s) it caches.
Still need info?
As announced a while ago, we are migrating to gitlab, and bugs that haven't seen activity in the last year or so will be not be migrated, but closed out in bugzilla. If this bug is still relevant to you, you can open a new issue describing the symptoms and how to reproduce it with gtk 3.22.x or master in gitlab: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/issues/new