KConfig Bug?

Ian Reinhart Geiser geiseri at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 26 14:13:51 BST 2003

Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 26 June 2003 07:42 am, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Thursday 26 June 2003 06:56, Benjamin Meyer wrote:
> > P.S.  After changing KAutoConfig to match what is stated in
> > kdelibs/kdecore/KCONFIG_DESIGN I was "flamed" and told to revert.  If
> > KCONFIG_DESIGN is incorrect and I should not be using kconfigbase class
> > can someone please fix the design file because as a developer to spend
> > time updating code to match the design doc only to be yelled at is really
> > irritating.
> For these remarks to be of any use you have to be way more specific.

AFAIK kconfigbase is suppose to be the interface from KConfigBackend to the 
main KConfig.  That being said, KConfigBase is actually kinda a bloated 
misdirected interface currently.  From what I have seen there is no logical 
reason why we should need a KConfigBase and KConfig at this point, since the 
functions in those classes is so mixed and confused, its clear they need to 
be joined.  I think the only reason this has not nappend yet is because its 

Really KConfigBase should be avoided so we can continue to clean up the API 
pre KDE 4.0.  Currently the design ensures that we cannot have multiple 
backends, and that its VERY VERY hard to keep multiple instances of 
applications prefs in sync effectively.  Lucky due to waldo's awesome speed 
hacks we dont notice this on the INI backend, but on my SQL backend I was 
able to push my postgres server into a frenzy as it requerried the server 
about 49 times in konqis start up :) (*note* this is because of braindamages 
in how we do our standard dirs, and local stuff, not neccicarily kconfig.  If 
i hack my env down, i can get konqi startup to only reparse KConfig files 
about 27-30 times.  also when i say reparse, i mean it calls the reparse 
config of an individual file.  afaik we only call reparse config everytime 
any stddir or resource is added...  the problem is the complexity grows as 
you add more files.) 

LDAP was even worse, but that was because I made the mistake of doing each key 
as an entry and not one file as an entry.  

Needless to say, for end developers there is no reason other than to build a 
backend that one needs KConfigBase, and from what I can see KConfigBase 
should go away asap.  Unless someone (waldo) knows of a VERY good reason why 
such an evil pair as KConfig/KConfigBase should exist together? 

Just my 2c 
- -ian reinhart geiser

- -- 
- --:Ian Reinhart Geiser <geiseri at yahoo.com>
- --:Public Key: http://geiseri.myip.org/~geiseri/publickey.asc
- --:Public Calender: http://geiseri.myip.org/~geiseri/publicevents.ics
- --:Jabber: geiseri at geiseri.myip.org
- --:Be an optimist -- at least until they start moving animals in 
- --:   pairs to Cape Canaveral. ~ Source Unknown
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list