On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 02:12 -0600, Elijah Newren wrote: > On 9/22/06, Alexander Larsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Uhm? Why not use X for IPC? > > *shrug* I remember that we (Matthias, Vytas, and I) discussed D-Bus, > Bonobo, and Bacon (since there were several Gnome applications using > each of those for their single-instance mechanism) and X (which > Matthias brought up and also since Mozilla/Firefox uses it for its > single-instance mechanism). However, I no longer recall any details > about this particular choice since I was more interested in the WM > interaction details (surprise, surprise). It may have been that Vytas > was familiar with D-Bus and Bacon and we figured it was more important > to get other details worked out first, but I just don't remember. > > However, Vytas did design GUnique to make the backend easy to > transparently replace.
I frequently use XNest at work. Some of the builds I have to run automatically open and close hundreds of windows. So I run the builds inside XNest, and I don't have to look at all those windows popping up on my screen. If I try to open an application inside XNest that I already have available outside XNest, and if that application uses one of our existing single-instance schemes (like bonobo), I get another window *outside* the XNest, which is annoying. Using X for IPC would, presumably, solve this. -- Shaun _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
