Just to summarize what we talked about in IRC the other day with my
understanding of the situation right now...
We use libversit in 2 places. It is in the Evolution plugin, but I don't
think it is required (at least not any more). The Evolution plugin
doesn't call it directly - it actually makes a
Out of curiosity, how would you suggest getting the GUI to interact with
the daemon? By modifying the daemon's config files / gconf and then
sending it a SIGHUP to reread its configuration?
Tom
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 09:59, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think we should dissociate GUI and sy
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 14:47, Tom Foottit wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how would you suggest getting the GUI to interact with
> the daemon? By modifying the daemon's config files / gconf and then
> sending it a SIGHUP to reread its configuration?
To reload configuration, a standard SIGHUP could do it
> I think that we could at least use a UNIX socket.
> All of this would be implemented in libmultisync that would be called by
> any client (GUI or not) of multisyncd.
I guess all the Gnome people would say "Bonobo". It probably makes
sense.
The GUI/lib separation could be useful, but we should
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 15:45, Bo Lincoln wrote:
> > I think that we could at least use a UNIX socket.
> > All of this would be implemented in libmultisync that would be called by
> > any client (GUI or not) of multisyncd.
>
> I guess all the Gnome people would say "Bonobo". It probably makes
> sens
Il gio, 2003-09-25 alle 10:16, Hubert Figuiere ha scritto:
> On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 15:45, Bo Lincoln wrote:
> > > I think that we could at least use a UNIX socket.
> > > All of this would be implemented in libmultisync that would be called by
> > > any client (GUI or not) of multisyncd.
> >
> > I
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 17:32, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> > Of course that is my only opinion, but given the effort put in
> > freedesktop.org to get unified desktops, I don't see why multisync could
> > not attempt to do the same and be part of the game. Anyway it is your
> > baby and you can disagree i
Il gio, 2003-09-25 alle 12:06, Hubert Figuiere ha scritto:
> On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 17:32, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> > Yeah. It would be nice to have a standard plug-in specification for the
> > sync framework. Each desktop could then have their own sync daemon/gui,
> > but could share some plug-ins or
According to Rodney Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Actually, I just thought about this and the idea that someone may be
> using an application from one environment, in another. I agree somewhat.
> But sadly, since nobody can agree on an IPC method, this sucks.
Am I mistaken or has this been discuss
Hi
this little patch should get rid of the zombies that like to appear
especially when using the evo plugin
Armin
--- ../../multisync/src/syncengine.c2003-09-25 20:58:39.0 +0200
+++ src/syncengine.c2003-09-25 23:15:04.0 +0200
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-/*
+/*
MultiSync - A PIM
According to Tom Foottit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> We use libversit in 2 places. It is in the Evolution plugin, but I don't
> think it is required (at least not any more). The Evolution plugin
> doesn't call it directly - it actually makes a few calls to libical
> (includes ical.h).
>
> The libversi
According to Armin Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> +void sig_child(int crap)
> +{
> + waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG);
> +signal(SIGCHLD,sig_child);
> +}
>
> int main (int argc, char **argv)
> {
> @@ -1988,6 +1995,7 @@
>textdomain (PACKAGE);
> #endif
>
> + signal(SIGCHLD,sig_ch
12 matches
Mail list logo
