kprocess, kpty & kdesu

Oswald Buddenhagen ossi at
Thu May 3 09:06:50 BST 2007

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:47:08PM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > look for setUsePty and then think about how using bare kpty (that
> > is, even less than old kprocess offers) with qprocess would look
> > like.
> Ok, I agree that even those few applications that need ptys should be
> able to use a simple API. How about KTerminalProcess then?
KPtyProcess would fit sufficiently well, if you ask me. ;)

> Or KUnixProcess? Just a slightly different name to stress that the
> fact this is not mean for applications portable to Windows.
you trolls are a bit paranoid about non-portable apis, huh? ;)
why should somebody be upset if a generic class supports system-specific
extensions? this lowest-common-denominator approach sucks outright - we
agreed on that for the application level and it would be silly not to
reflect it in the apis.

> Anyway, I think I've said all I can and we risk running in circles. It
> was an interesting thread for sure and this is my last mail to it :)
oh, no, not that fast, dude. you shot down kprocess with kpty
integration and a generic wrapper for character devices (btw, i strongly
support deleting QFile - i see no reason why block devices should get
any kind of advantage), but left sufficiently many points from the
original mail unsanswered and provided no alternatives to the killed

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list