[PATCH] Multi-Protocol IO-Slave
kevin.krammer at gmx.at
Sun Jan 13 22:58:52 GMT 2008
On Sunday 13 January 2008, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
> >> * Part of KIO sits in kded i think (but i'm not an expert on this) - i
> >> wouldn't call that desktop independent.
> >The slave scheduler/launcher. Used through DCOP in KDE3 and through
> > D-Bus in KDE4 (AFAIK). Could have been implemented as a separate
> > process and using an independent name if necessary.
> That's klauncher. It's an independent program (not part of kded) whose
> only purpose is to launch ioslaves and other applications.
Good point, thanks for correcting this.
I think this makes it even more obvious that the services of klauncher are
used through IPC, thus not being tied to a specific implementation.
> Which brings me to two suggestions for future work:
> 1) a KDE/Qt-based implementation of the required parts of GIO, so that KDE
> developers "feel at home" writing ioslaves.
I don't think anyone really opposes this, it is more a question whether it is
better to wrap the already existing libraries or implement the protocol stack
Last time I checked (somewhen before New Year, during a similar discussion
with Norbert on dot.kde.org) there weren't any protocol specification
available yet, thus making the second option more a matter of reverse
engineering, a mistake we have obviously made with DCOP and KIO before.
My guess is that they will need at least one or probably two real world
releases until they can provide such a specification, e.g. needing real world
testing of the concept in different applications.
Until then an adaptor approach like the IO slave developed by Norbert is
probably more suitable.
Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the kde-core-devel