Why do desktop environments make custom xdg-open replacements?

Question

Related to this answer on my previous question.

So, XDG can handle it on its own:

It can manage default applications - xdg-mime
It can open file with associated application - xdg-open.

Why do desktop environments make their own replacements for xdg-open? Like gvfs-open, kde-open, or exo-open,...

Isn't xdg-open enough? If not, what does it lack?

score 6 · Accepted Answer · answered Feb 16 '15 at 18:42

6

The Arch Wiki says:

Inside a desktop environment (e.g. GNOME, KDE, or Xfce), xdg-open simply passes the arguments to that desktop environment's file-opener application (gvfs-open, kde-open, or exo-open, respectively), which means that the associations are left up to the desktop environment. When no desktop environment is detected (for example when one runs a standalone window manager, e.g. Openbox), xdg-open will use its own configuration files.

So, they are not replacements, but backends.

answered Feb 16 '15 at 18:42

muru

72,889

2

This presumably allows the DE's freedom to, e.g., implement functionality that may not be provided by xdg-open. – goldilocks Feb 16 '15 at 19:09
2

@goldilocks Rather, it's to allow e.g. PDF files to be opened by Okular under KDE, Evince under Gnome, etc. – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' Feb 16 '15 at 21:44
2

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/144047/how-does-xdg-open-do-its-work has more about how the delegation works. – deltab Feb 16 '15 at 22:36
@Gilles That's not "rather", that's "as in" ;) – goldilocks Feb 17 '15 at 01:05

Why do desktop environments make custom xdg-open replacements?

1 Answers1