Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 01:12:56 -0400 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> To: John Merryweather Cooper <johnmary@adelphia.net> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: New gconf key policy Message-ID: <1088053975.91312.28.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <20040624051014.GB12820@borgdemon.losaca.adelphia.net> References: <1088040025.91312.14.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20040624030021.GA56728@borgdemon.losaca.adelphia.net> <1088049270.91312.19.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20040624044920.GA12820@borgdemon.losaca.adelphia.net> <1088052939.91312.25.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20040624051014.GB12820@borgdemon.losaca.adelphia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-5bXctGOONqM+2ps7VNZS Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 01:10, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 12:55:39AM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 00:49, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:54:30PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 23:00, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 09:20:25PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote= : > > > > > > Please take a look at the latest update to archivers/fileroller= , and let > > > > > > me know what you think. This is the new gconf policy I think w= e need to > > > > > > adopt if we're to survive the upcoming gconf changes in GNOME 2= .8 (it's > > > > > > similar to the way we handle OMF files now). This will also ma= ke gconf > > > > > > handling much more robust with respect to plists. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > The one downside I see with this is that we will miss Makefile = bugs that > > > > > > prevent proper schema installation. One way around that is to = add a > > > > > > pkg-install script to each port that installs gconf schemas, an= d do > > > > > > gconf registration there. This may be more work than it's wort= h, > > > > > > though. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > What are people's thoughts on this? Thanks. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > Joe > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > --=20 > > > > > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc > > > > >=20 > > > > > Well, there seems to be an increasing amount of post-install task= s in > > > > > GNOME ports, so I think the idiom of using a pkg-install script f= or > > > > > each port is a good one. > > > >=20 > > > > So far, there are only two (counting gconf) post-[de]install handle= rs > > > > that are being added the plists. I've written an omf.pl script (in= my > > > > CVS repo) to handle automatically adding OMF handlers. I plan on d= oing > > > > the same for gconf. Given that, a pkg-install script might add mor= e > > > > repo bloat that we need at this time. > > > >=20 > > > > > Turning to a design issue, do you see the > > > > > changes to gconf handling as making debugging of gconf-related > > > > > issues easier or harder. I'm having a devil of a time wrestling = an > > > > > update of comms/gfax into working order because of gconf issues. > > > >=20 > > > > I don't think it will make gconf issues any harder to troubleshoot.= =20 > > > > Like I said, it will "mask" the problem we see occasionally when a > > > > developer messes up one of the Makefiles, and schemas are not prope= rly > > > > installed. > > > >=20 > > > > What gconf problems are you having? > > > >=20 > > > > Joe > > > >=20 > > > > >=20 > > > > > jmc > > > > >=20 > > > > --=20 > > > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc > > >=20 > > > See attached patch to make comms/gfax into 0.6.0 (the gtk#) version. > > >=20 > > > Everything compiles and installs fine, but attempting to start gfax > > > gives errors about not being able to find two key values. I'd be > > > more specific, but I'm rebuilding GNOME right now and so my X is > > > unavailable to me. > >=20 > > Well, this looks like a problem. From the gfax root Makefile: > >=20 > > env GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=3D"" gconftool-2 --makefile-install-rule $(SCHE= MA) > >=20 > > This should probably be: > >=20 > > GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=3D`gconftool-2 --get-default-source` gconftool-2 > > --makefile-install-rule $(SCHEMA) > >=20 > > And of course, don't forget to install the schema file so you can remov= e > > the keys upon deinstall (something this application doesn't seem to do)= . > >=20 > > Joe > >=20 > > >=20 > > > jmc > > --=20 > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc >=20 > I'll make those changes. Interestingly, the line there was taken straigh= t > from the original Makefile. Is this a case of having a relocatable PREFI= X > and the author of gfax assuming a given location (e.g., some default > locatin that results when GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE is set to ""? Actually, I've never seen GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE set to "". I'm not sure what it does exactly, but my thought is, it's a no-op. The example I gave you is not PREFIX-safe, but it is gconf-safe. The PREFIX-safe solution would be to set GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE to xml::$(PREFIX)/etc/gconf/gconf.xml.defaults. Joe >=20 > jmc >=20 --=20 PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc --=-5bXctGOONqM+2ps7VNZS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBA2mLXb2iPiv4Uz4cRAgqEAKCB1VbG4IXT4XlZTLVmX1L5ygLR6QCfXZck hUujq2/26YBl+0C4zayvSes= =xIUS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-5bXctGOONqM+2ps7VNZS--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1088053975.91312.28.camel>