Created attachment 198092 [details] Screenshot: how LibreOffice shows up in the system monitor's processes list on Linux 1. Open any LibreOffice application 2. Open gnome-system-monitor and try to find it in the Processes list Actual Result: It is only listed as "soffice.bin" (and "oosplash", even though the app has been launched and presumably doesn't need a splashcreen process to remain?), with no app icon. Additionally, if you are running the flatpak version, you will see the accompanying "bwrap" processes. Expected result: - Ideally, a per-app process name and icon (ex: LibreOffice-Calc with its icon) - Otherwise, a global suite process name (ex: libreoffice, with the general icon) Most other apps manage to do this, so presumably LibreOffice can, too. ------------- Tested with: Version: 24.8.3.2 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 48a6bac9e7e268aeb4c3483fcf825c94556d9f92 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 6.11; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US Flatpak Calc: threaded
No imperative to do this, and as LibreOffice is a monolithic app each of the "modules" run as some instance of soffice.bin. Nothing to be gained by wrapping that into some other string. -1
Please share a screenshot with other user space software in gnome-system-monitor, like Firefox, text editor, PDF viewer, etc.
Created attachment 198118 [details] Screenshot - among other applications Thank you for your willingness to entertain the idea. As requested, here is a screenshot showing other applications identifying themselves nicely, and setting their icon. Note that among those, only 3 of thome are flatpaks, the rest are system-installed native packages. As you can see, it's not a flatpak-specific thing, and it's been possible since time immemorial.
We can't change the process name but about icon for it we can think I hope
Kind of similar question in bug 164311. And aren't there worse applications listed among the processes?
> Kind of similar question in bug 164311. I don't see how this directly relates; I'm not asking to change the binaries' names or paths on the filesystem, I'm asking for the application to more helpfully nickname itself in the Linux processes list so that it's more recognizeable and humanized. If even Python apps can do it, why can't LibreOffice? > aren't there worse applications listed among the processes? I don't really think that "There are one or two other bad* apples among the ones listed in the screenshot" is a good reason for this app to avoid naming itself properly like the 20+ other apps that are clearly recognizeable in that screenshot. I'd rather want to encourage LibreOffice to lead by example like the other good apps. --- *: I don't even know which ones you are referring to in my screenshot, other than maybe gjs and tracker-miner-fs-3... but Tracker is getting renamed precisely to make it easier for people looking at the processes list to figure out what they are: https://blogs.gnome.org/carlosg/2024/07/14/goodbye-tracker-hello-tinysparql-and-localsearch/
(In reply to Jeff Fortin Tam from comment #6) > I'd rather want to encourage LibreOffice to lead by example > like the other good apps. oosplash => LibreOffice Start Screen soffice.bin => LibreOffice But if you start from Calc, for example, the entry is "soffice.bin --calc" and remains as this even after closing Calc and starting Writer. But I agree with your point: a more user-friendly name would be nice. Feel free to reopen.
> But if you start from Calc, for example, the entry is "soffice.bin --calc" > and remains as this even after closing Calc and starting Writer. I understand that everything is a central dispatcher application with parameters, instead of individual applications; to be clear, I think it would be fine for the app to nickname its process "libreoffice" no matter which "app" component is running; at least it would be somewhat recognizeable in line with the project's brand :)
Hossein, this might be an easyhack - or a wontfix due to effort ;-)
If this helps, I saw someone do a pretty simple implementation in an app today: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/showtime/-/merge_requests/73 If you look at that commit's Python code diff, you can see that for GTK applications it boils down to two GLib function calls: * https://docs.gtk.org/glib/func.set_prgname.html * https://docs.gtk.org/glib/func.set_application_name.html
Hm... we do set these parameters, see https://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/vcl/unx/gtk3/gtkdata.cxx?r=6bd1d2d241ecc5c4a8d340c9847e2e366752c9d7#531
(In reply to Jeff Fortin Tam from comment #6) > > Kind of similar question in bug 164311. > I don't see how this directly relates; I'm not asking to change the > binaries' names or paths on the filesystem, I'm asking for the application > to more helpfully nickname itself in the Linux processes list so that it's > more recognizeable and humanized. If even Python apps can do it, why can't > LibreOffice? The goal is not clear for me. You have some binaries, soffice.bin and oosplash, and some script, soffice, that run on Linux, and similar names on other platforms. These names are important, they are displayed in different places and the output of different commands, and people use these names to change/stop/manipulate the process(es). Then, what is wrong here? A binary executable can have some short name, and this is not strange. Please provide an example to make it easier to understand the feature request. Which program is doing something similar to your request? And in case of using long, descriptive aliases, wouldn't it be harder to change/stop/manipulate the process(es), without knowing the name of the actual binary file? You may argue that we need to change the binary name to something like 'libreoffice', or even get rid of the soffice script (for example, because of tdf#163863), but without these changes, I don't see any possible way to achieve what you want. We have window names that have clear, human readable names, and those should be enough. In current form, unfortunately I can only recommend a wontfix.