GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 596564
Uses application icon in system tray
Last modified: 2009-10-09 17:35:38 UTC
It appears that gnome-bluetooth is using its application icon in the system tray! (The same icon it uses for its menu entry and About dialog). This severely limits what can be done for visual styling (eg: Ubuntu 9.10's pretty system tray icons) and just has incorrect semantics: this IS a status icon, after all. gnome-bluetooth's applet should use (and ship) a different icon, for example bluetooth-active, for its gtk status icon.
Created attachment 144156 [details] [review] Patch to use a bluetooth status icon instead of app icon And here is a patch. I haven't tested it much because my system isn't arranged for this stuff right now, but judging by ./applet/test-icon and some other prodding, it should be fine. I made a small change to applet/test-icon.c and added a bunch of icons called hicolor_status_*_bluetooth-active.* which get installed to the appropriate place. (hicolor/status/*).
Andreas, should we use the original icons to generate those ones instead of re-modifying the "disabled" icons?
Under-the-hood-wise it sounds sane to have different icons used for application and status. At the same time it means more icons to keep track of. Are there other issues than wanting to use monocrome icons in the notification area? Could perhaps https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-store/+bug/433858/comments/3 be a solution (in the longer run that is).
(In reply to comment #3) > Under-the-hood-wise it sounds sane to have different icons used for application > and status. At the same time it means more icons to keep track of. Are there afaik freedesktop icon spec allows fallbacks. so in case your main icon is called "bluetooth" ... you should be able to refer to ask for "bluetooth-status" and get the bluetooth icon in case the theme does not provide one. In that way upstream and themes can choose whether they want to use a different icon or not. At least thats the theory from what i understand. correct me if i am mistaken ...
just to clarify myself, more icons in the tree isn't really that much of a issue for me. Mostly wondering.
my idea would have been to use the new name in code and not ship any new icon ... which reduces requirements on themers and doesnt duplicate identical icons, while providing the name for themes that want that. Anyway, thanks for landing this.