On 8/6/07, Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/6/07, John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/4/07, Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm curious, what are the plans for recursive directory monitoring in > > > GVFS? > > > > No. > > Ok... so apps will have to implement this by themselves... either with > inotify or perhaps with GVFS's monitor API (don't know if this is > feasible but I guess it should be?). Either way, it seems non optimal. >
How many apps actually need recursive monitoring? I can think only of Beagle and other desktop search engines. Apps like f-spot and rhythmbox monitor N directories where N is small, nautilus/file selector monitor open windows, and other apps watch their configuration files. My point being that lacking this feature is not a problem for 99% of apps. If an application really needs recursive monitoring they are better off doing it themselves and using a smarter algorithm than brute force. For example, I have been told that beagle uses two separate inotify instances, one for busy directories and one for non-busy directories. -- John McCutchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gnome-vfs-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-vfs-list
