I don't understand why this system of release-specific overrides which point to a release-specific background file is necessary. Shouldn't '/usr/share/backgrounds/default.xml', as in the mate-rhel.gschema.override file, work just fine so long as we make sure the right backgrounds packages are installed?
Yes, that's true. /usr/share/backgrounds/f30/default/f30.xml is just a symlink
And we don't need both dirs
/usr/share/backgrounds/f30 and
/usr/share/backgrounds/f29
Not sure, but i think in older fedora releases the dir schema was like in rhel7.
This update has been submitted for testing by raveit65.
I don't understand why this system of release-specific overrides which point to a release-specific background file is necessary. Shouldn't '/usr/share/backgrounds/default.xml', as in the
mate-rhel.gschema.overridefile, work just fine so long as we make sure the right backgrounds packages are installed?Yes, that's true. /usr/share/backgrounds/f30/default/f30.xml is just a symlink And we don't need both dirs /usr/share/backgrounds/f30 and /usr/share/backgrounds/f29 Not sure, but i think in older fedora releases the dir schema was like in rhel7.
See with f20 we used /usr/share/backgrounds/default.png as path. https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/mate-desktop.git/tree/mate-fedora-f20.gschema.override?h=f20 Than we start using xml desktop files with f21 and the path was changed. /usr/share/backgrounds/f21/default/f21.xml https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/mate-desktop.git/tree/mate-fedora-f21.gschema.override?h=f21
This update has been pushed to testing.
This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to stable now if the maintainer wishes
This update has been submitted for batched by raveit65.
This update has been submitted for stable by raveit65.
This update has been pushed to stable.