GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 792819
info: Ability to define vendor-specific logo
Last modified: 2018-01-23 16:45:03 UTC
In Endless OS, we have a downstream patch for gnome-control-center that allows us to easily define a vendor/branding-specific logo to be shown in the Info panel, by dropping a INI file in a system directory (`/var/lib/gnome-control-center/vendor.conf` by default, but we can configure that): https://github.com/endlessm/gnome-control-center/commit/d66736a74079e5cfec315e3b1a1234b02b836304 While not used in the default images of EOS that you can download from our website, this has proven very useful in some deployments where the customer requires us to "brand" our images in specific ways, and I think it could be useful to land it upstream since distros could be interested as well. FWIW, I can already see in [1] that Fedora is patching g-c-c to achieve a similar effect, so there's already at least one potential client of this feature out there that I know of (besides Endless). [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/control-center.git/tree/distro-logo.patch
This is a possible duplicate of bug 695691. By the way, Ubuntu uses a variation of the Fedora patch, so I confirm it is a popular feature for distros.
Created attachment 367296 [details] [review] info: allow defining vendor specific logos See attached the same patch we have on Endless rebased on top of g-c-c's master branch, ported to meson and tested locally. Please review, thanks!
(In reply to Jeremy Bicha from comment #1) > This is a possible duplicate of bug 695691. > > By the way, Ubuntu uses a variation of the Fedora patch, so I confirm it is > a popular feature for distros. Ooops! I didn't see your comment before posting the patch, sorry. I will leave this bug open for now in case we want to keep it separate from bug 695691 (as this one is specific about allowing configuring your logo) and comment there, thanks for the pointer!
As discussed on IRC, I think the easiest way to implement this would be to have a parameter for the logo name added to systemd's os-release file, similarly to: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/ed9e8bf66d1b3a00aa7fb6d57ec89dd8a3b8d7dc And have the code show the gnome logo if absent, and the gnome version instead of the os version if /etc/os-release is missing. Note that if a distro/os version is available, we'd want to show the GNOME version separately.
> As discussed on IRC, I think the easiest way to implement this would be to > have a parameter for the logo name added to systemd's os-release file, > similarly to: > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/ > ed9e8bf66d1b3a00aa7fb6d57ec89dd8a3b8d7dc > > And have the code show the gnome logo if absent, and the gnome version > instead of the os version if /etc/os-release is missing. Note that if a > distro/os version is available, we'd want to show the GNOME version > separately. I missed that discussion sorry, I don't really look at the IRC window much unless someone pings me explicitly. In any case, I think such mechanism would work too, although I'd say it would be still nice that there were a mechanism to include a way to specify the name (or path) to a image file explicitly, instead of simply deriving it from the ID rightaway, for greater flexibility. If no logo name/file is explicitly set, then I guess it could be derived from the ID, finally falling back to the GNOME logo if nothing is found.
Hi Mario, first of all, thanks for reporting this issue and crafting this patch. Per Bastien's comment on 792819, the preferred way to go for distro-specific logos is by adding a new "LOGO" field to /etc/os-release. The solution proposed by your patch does not implement that though, and it's not the way we agreed on to proceed. Thus, I'll mark the patch as rejected. I'll also close this bug in favor of 792819 itself, and we'll track this work there. Thanks again for your contribution, it's highly appreciated!
Review of attachment 367296 [details] [review]: Marking the patch as rejected per previous comment.
Thanks Georges, no worries about rejecting my patch, what matters is that we'll have a way to define vendor-specific logos in a way or another, which will hopefully helps us (and others) get rid of the downstream changes and embrace an unified way of doing these kind of things.
I assume we want logo to be just an icon name without an extension (like 'fedora-logo') instead of an absolute path. That way, a client app could possibly easily use a symbolic version of the icon if available. By the way, GDM offers a distro logo option and that's a popular feature among distros (Debian enables it for instance). The GDM distro logo is often white and there is room for it to be horizontal. (Fedora and Ubuntu use a simple circle logo in their gnome-control-center patches.) So I'm thinking it might make sense to have at least the 2 variants in /etc/os-release: square and rectangle (or whatever the terminology is for those). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 695691 ***