[PATCH] Multi-Protocol IO-Slave
nf2 at scheinwelt.at
Sun Jan 13 18:28:30 GMT 2008
Kevin Krammer wrote:
> On Sunday 13 January 2008, nf2 wrote:
>> Jeff Mitchell wrote:
>>> Personally, I'm all for a single network transparency library (or a
>>> single authentication caching library, which would serve the purpose). I
>>> do think it's utterly stupid that the GNOMEs couldn't contribute to KIO,
>>> which already has a bazillion working, useful KIOslaves, unless they felt
>>> (as they seem to) that GIO/GVFS is better by design. Still, it does reek
>>> a bit of "we just can't allow ourselves to use anything with a K in it"
>> The problem is that KIO always had desktop/GUI-toolkit dependencies and
>> KDE developers never cared to remove them - so it's your fault, guys.
> As far as I know there aren't any.
> If you are referring to the issue that there hasn't been any formal
> specification of the KIO master/slave protocol I am not aware of any such
> thing regarding GIO/GFVS either.
Of course there are/were lots of toolkit and KDE dependencies:
* AFAIK a GUI-less Qt-Core didn't exist until Qt4. It hasn't been
attractive for anyone outside KDE having to install a full blown GUI
toolkit library just to use KIO. Of course with Qt4 the situation might
* The KIO client always had - and still has - UI stuff inside.
* Part of KIO sits in kded i think (but i'm not an expert on this) - i
wouldn't call that desktop independent.
I didn't really refer to standardizing the internal KIO master/slave
protocol. I don't think that would have been necessary as long as the
rest of the system (client library/protocol handlers) were desktop
independent in terms of dependencies. Just like everyone uses libsmbclient.
More information about the kde-core-devel