Re: [Evolution-hackers] Plugin and menu icons
Le dimanche 10 juin 2007 17:05 +0400, Nickolay V. Shmyrev a crit : В Сбт, 09/06/2007 в 17:45 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue пишет: Le vendredi 27 avril 2007 10:07 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue a crit : after reading more code, it seems bonoboui doesn't like icons starting with the stock_ prefix. It throws Bonobo-CRITICAL **: bonobo_ui_util_xml_to_pixbuf: assertion `length 4 * 2 * 2 + 1' failed at the command line. The result is that the icon for folder-refresh and for any other menu item wanting to use a stock_* icon, it just won't appear. I thought it could be a problem with libbonoboui but then I remembered that it works perfectly fine for popup menus. As gtk-* icons are far from covering what we can add as icons in the menus, please, please help me fix this issue. Hello Gilles It's really hard to understand original problem and reasons for that since not much is described. What are you trying to do really? About way to convince bonoboui what about registration of stock icon and then usage it in libbonoboui with pixtype=stock? I'm not sure why libbonoboui tries to get pixbuf from your attribute (it's the task of the function bonobo_ui_util_xml_to_pixbuf). Looks like you misunderstand each other. What ui description are you passing to it? let's try with an example, take: http://svn.gnome.org/svn/evolution/trunk/ui/evolution-mail-list.xml there is a line in it that looks like: menuitem name=FolderRefresh verb= _label=Re_fresh... pixtype=stock pixname=stock_refresh/ The icon exists and is in the same folder where are stored other stock icons (gtk-add, gtk-undelete, ...) but it doesn't show up in the UI Right, because gtk-add is not the name of the file but id of the stock icon: http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/gtk-Themeable-Stock-Images.html You should register your own stock icon if you want to use them. I suspect stock_refresh is not registered or registered under different name, say gtk-refresh. Probably it was registered earlier in libgnome and was dropped now. ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 11:39 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 08:14 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: server says: * 1 EXPUNGE camel-imap-summary does: g_ptr_array_remove_index (messages, seqid - 1); In imap_rescan, for example in case a message got removed by another E-mail client while this E-mail client was not online. A hash table won't solve this... Jeff ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: [Ross wrote] Second question: even if it creates a folder, does it need to stick around for the folder creation to finish? I think I remember seeing that camel was single-threaded not true... , relying on the client app to do threading. Would there be a way to multi-thread this somewhere (either in camel or in the app)? Obviously doing so would complicate things, because at some point one might need to block (e.g., if I move a message from folder A to B and then switch the UI to look at B). okay, I think you need to familiarize yourself with Camel's API before we discuss anything further :) http://www.go-evolution.org/Mail_Threading begins The Camel API is blocking and synchronous although it then goes on to qualify this: Custom Threads Two tasks inside Camel use threads internally in order to implement a cancellable api ontop of a non-cancellable one. Further Mail-OPS mail-ops.h contains asynchronous versions of varous Camel api's It sounds as if mail-ops is outside of Camel, however. So it sounds as if Camel could (in principle) respond to a move request by issuing the appropriate IMAP command and then, starting a thread to do the other activities (indexing the target folder and deleting the the message from the source folder) and return. It would then block on operations that attempted to access the target folder until the other operations completed. I think this could be called a syncronous API, though perhaps that's a stretch. On the other hand, http://www.go-evolution.org/Camel.Operation does not sound like a bocking syncronous API at all, so maybe the statement quoted at the top is just obsolete? So, first of all I'm confused about the nature of Camel's API and operation as far as threading and syncronicity. Second, I don't have a sense of whether its features are historical accidents (camel was implemented in a simple way and evo then used it as it was) or the result of some deliberate design decisions. Blocking syncronous operations are simpler to implement, to use, to debug, and to understand, so they clearly have some advantages. But it seems that the entire application (evolution) does not have that character, so the benefits of that simplicity end up lost anyway. ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
