Re: Can Nautilus plugins set icons for files?

[Joshua Judson Rosen <rozzin geekspace com>]

Stian Skjelstad <stian nixia no> writes:
>
> > Is it possible for a plugin to supply files' icons? If so, where
> > should I look to learn how to do this in my plugin? Does anyone have a
> > reference to tutorial on hand, or would somone be so kind as to write
> > me a little example code? :)
> 
> I'm no expert in nautilus source code, but doesn't nautilus depend on
> glib/GIO to supply it with icons?

Yes, Nautilus does currently gets its icons by way of the underlying
libraries in GNOME. That's what I'm looking to augment.

> If so, shouldn't you look into patching/plugin for GLib/GIO? (and
> the icons would also then appear in all applications, and not just
> nautilus).

Actually, no--though I appreciate the suggestion; I've thought along
those lines myself, but I don't think that's what I want to do--at
least `not right now'.

For one thing, I still need access to those icons, so I can't just
replace them wholesale like that.

Well, maybe I /could/--but it'd be a much more invasive set of changes
that I'd be doing, and this is a patch that I don't expect to `just be
accepted' upstream without having proven itself--these are
user-visible changes, after all.

The reason I'd like to create a Nautilus plugin is that it'd be more
easily consumable than requiring the end user to patch and rebuild
Nautilus, or install a special build of Nautilus from me; or requiring
upstream to incorporate my patches. And it'll be much easier for my
contribution to `prove itself' if it's easier for users to try it
out. So, I suppose I could say that plugin should basically be less
`controversial' than a patch; and a plugin for one specific area of
the desktop should be less controversial than a patch that affects
*everything*.

Also, at least for the time being, it should be easier to maintain a
plugin than to maintain a patch ;)

If you're up for invasive patches, though, then maybe you'd like to
try mine :)

Actually, it's not really /that/ invasive, right now; but it is
something a little short of `elegant'.

-- 
Don't be afraid to ask (Lf.((Lx.xx) (Lr.f(rr)))).