Dear CRUX port maintainers, as I shared in #crux-devel earlier today, the recent update to adwaita-icon-theme dropped many of the stock icons. A number of gtk3 apps in our port collections still try to load these stock icons using deprecated code (`grep -n ^GDK_DEPRECATED /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gtk/*.h` will help locate some of these legacy functions). Also affected is at least one of the ports in /usr/ports/opt (geeqie). There's already an issue on the gtk gitlab (https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/4790), so perhaps a fix will soon be available from upstream. In the meantime, I've been trying without much success to patch the problematic code in my affected ports using basic sed substitutions. But even after replacing these function calls with the newer (post-3.10) syntax, I still got a Gtk-WARNING about failure to locate the requested stock icons. I think it's not enough to change the function calls superficially, because the icons themselves are not locatable using the same const char arguments as before. A port maintainer would have to write a dictionary to help "carry out the relevant name conversions", which is less viable than just pushing the issue upstream. If anyone else is maintaining ports affected by the icon theme upgrade, what would you suggest as an interim measure (until the issue is addressed upstream)? Leave a README in the port tree warning users about a degraded UI unless adwaita-icon-theme is reverted to its previous version? Post a new issue with the developers of our affected ports suggesting that legacy icon-loading code be replaced by its GTK3-3.24.10+ counterpart? In light of the last post in the XFCE mailing list thread shared by dlcusa (http://dlcusa.net/CRUX/XFCE_Wayland.mbox), I worry that by pursuing the latter option we dodge the issue of recruiting caretakers for an abandoned GTK3 branch, as the GTK project focuses more of its effort on version 4 and GNOME-specific apps. It would seem less wasteful of effort to insert the fix directly into the gtk codebase (in the manner suggested by Rich's response to Andrzej in the XFCE thread, or by ChrisVine in the gtk gitlab) than to distribute among many app developers the task of chasing a moving target (i.e., the set of functions not yet deprecated by the current stable release of gtk3). But aggregate amount of developer effort is not the only relevant consideration, so I'm open to hearing counterarguments that might persuade me to file bug reports with the authors of my affected ports. Thanks for your thoughts. -- John