Complex question about KDED

[Albert Vaca]

The problem seems to be in bool Device::sendOwnPublicKey()

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Albert Vaca <albertvaka at gmail.com> wrote:
> I get this on the debug log:
>
> kdeconnectd(5951)/kdeconnect_kded Device::privateReceivedPackage: Pair request
> kdeconnect(5951)/kdeconnect_kded Device::acceptPairing: Accepted pairing
> kded(32211)/kdeconnect_kded: Process error code= 1
> kded(32211)/kdeconnect_kded: Process crashed with code= 0
> kded(32211)/kdeconnect_kded: ""
> kded(32211)/kdeconnect_kded Kded::onFinished: Restarting in 5 sec...
>
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Albert Vaca <albertvaka at gmail.com> wrote:
>> After the split up,  the KCM is not working anymore: I can not pair my
>> device. Maybe the dbus addresses have changed?
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Yuri Samoilenko <kinnalru at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes I think this we right.
>>>
>>> 17.01.2014 19:00 пользователь "Albert Vaca" <albertvaka at gmail.com> написал:
>>>
>>>> Or maybe we can wait to have both things done and stable (split and
>>>> filebrowsing) and make an official release, a blog post explaining it,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Albert Vaca <albertvaka at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Yes, this has to be done for stability reasons and because in KF5 what
>>>> > can
>>>> > be in a KDED will be more strictly limited. So perfect if you go ahead
>>>> > with
>>>> > it!
>>>> >
>>>> > But maybe we should merge first the filebrowsing branch? Actually you
>>>> > just
>>>> > pushed to the daemonsplit branch changes that should be in the
>>>> > filebrowsing
>>>> > branch, so they are a bit mixed now. Do you plan to make more changes to
>>>> > filebrowsing, or is it okay mergint it to master as it is?