Hi,
On 7/12/07, Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For applications that want to be single instance and can just rely on
D-Bus, there's no need to wait for a fancy unique application
library - just try to own your app's D-Bus name on startup, and exit
anytime you lose
The multiple backends, IMO, are just historical cruft from libgunique.
They reflect an inability of ours at the time to determine what the
right thing to use was. (Note that D-Bus was not stable at the time)
Vytautas, Matthias, and I figured that we'd eventually decide on just
one but
Hi,
Elijah Newren wrote:
I think you're still mostly ignoring a big part of the puzzle. IMO,
D-Bus (as it exists today) is not a complete solution for this
problem. I do not recall yet seeing an application author of a
single-instance application (whether they used D-Bus, X, bonobo,
bacon,
On 7/13/07, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've stopped changing the --version-info in gtkmm at all since a couple
of years ago to avoid problems, but I'd really like a simple set of
instructions about what to do in our most common cases, with examples of
actual --version-info numbers
Le samedi 14 juillet 2007, à 12:01 -0600, Elijah Newren a écrit :
On 7/13/07, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've stopped changing the --version-info in gtkmm at all since a couple
of years ago to avoid problems, but I'd really like a simple set of
instructions about what to do in
On Sun, 2007-07-15 at 01:05 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le samedi 14 juillet 2007, à 12:01 -0600, Elijah Newren a écrit :
On 7/13/07, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've stopped changing the --version-info in gtkmm at all since a couple
of years ago to avoid problems, but I'd
