KProcess documentation fix

Andreas Pakulat apaku at
Mon Nov 13 13:25:33 GMT 2006

On 13.11.06 09:28:07, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 05:42:46PM +0100, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > I'd like to know if it is ok to commit the attached change to
> > kdelibs/3.5. It fixes the KProcess documentation by documenting that
> > using QProcess and KProcess in the same application leads to problems
> > when using KPorcess::Block (see the KProcess thread here).
> > 
> that analysis is incomplete and thus misleading.
> mixing (as in using at the same time) qprocess and kprocess in *any* way
> will cause problems.
> it's also untrue that the problem is qprocess installing the signal
> handler each time. in fact, the problem is qprocess considering itself
> the only party interested in SIGCHLD. while this is fine for an
> application, it is not particularly nice of a libraray. the (sort of)
> correct behavior is the one of kprocess: chaining signal handlers
> (sounds a bit like interrupt redirection from "good" ol' DOS times,
> huh?).

Well, actually its also true for applications consisting of plugins as
can be seen in KDevelop. Anyway from what you and Christoph say it
should be fine to make sure that QProcess is deleted whenever the
process exited (which would re-install KProcess' signal handler)

I still think a comment about this should be added to KProcess
documentation, taking your explanation as basis. So back to the original
question there's currently no freeze for documentation changes?


Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list