On 30/11/2016 14:49, James Henstridge wrote:
> For what it is worth, I think there is value in keeping the blank/no app
> ID mode working for the benefit of trusted helpers that need to work on
> behalf of a number of confined processes using different AppArmor
> labels. You could special case
For what it is worth, I think there is value in keeping the blank/no app
ID mode working for the benefit of trusted helpers that need to work on
behalf of a number of confined processes using different AppArmor
labels. You could special case storage-framework, but I doubt we'll be
the last to
Thanks for taking the time to explain the idea. :-)
I have to tell you, that the new online-accounts-api is simpler than the
other API we have, and it's so in virtue of its more limited scope: it
was initially designed for click applications, or for unconfined
services acting on behalf of a
Sorry about the status change, that must have been a mouse click that
went astray :-(
You are correct in that applications won't get any oauth tokens or the
like. That's all handled by the storage framework. We pass the oauth
token into the *provider* implementation, so the provider can
Hi Michi, I guess you set the bug status to invalid by mistake?
OK, it looks like I had a very wrong idea of how the storage framework
would work. So let me recap my understanding, and please tell me if I
got it wrong.
You have your own UI to let the user configure which accounts to use,
and to
Hi Alberto, thanks for the quick reply!
The user shouldn't see storage framework when they authorize things in
Online Accounts. The user doesn't even know what a storage service is.
Besides, storage framework will be used for lots more things than just
synchronisation. Eventually, for each
If you are acting on behalf of other applications, you should use their
applicationId; but in your case I believe that you really want your own
applicationId. Let me try to explain why it's needed.
In the Online Accounts panel in the system settings, when the user
clicks on one existing account,
We don't have an application ID because the request comes from the
registry, which acts on behalf of all sorts of applications.
I don't understand the need for an ID. Right now, the getAccounts()
method returns me the full list of accounts. I know that I have a
google-drive account, an mcloud
As I wrote, you need to specify an application ID when instantiating the
manager:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/online-accounts-
api/+bug/1638769/comments/7
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Except for the trace I added, the code is in this branch:
https://code.launchpad.net/~michihenning/storage-framework/registry
The source file is here:
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~michihenning/storage-
framework/registry/view/head:/src/registry/internal/ListAccountsHandler.cpp
I have version
Thanks Michi, but I really need to see the parameters for the GetAccount call,
to see what applicationId you are passing.
Besides that, I see that the D-Bus reply you pasted does not include the array
of services: there isn't even an *empty* array, which suggests that the
** Changed in: online-accounts-api (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1643732
Title:
service() method returns invalid service instance
To
And this is the relevant struct as reported by dbus-monitor:
struct {
uint32 1
array [
dict entry(
string "authMethod"
variant int32 2
)
dict entry(
string "displayName"
Here is the relevant code:
QList accounts;
for (auto const& acct : manager_.availableAccounts())
{
auto const it = BUS_NAMES.find(acct->serviceId());
if (it == BUS_NAMES.end())
{
continue;
}
qDebug() << "using" << acct->serviceId();
Please attach the dbus-monitor (or equivalent app) logs.
** Changed in: online-accounts-api (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1643732
Title:
15 matches
Mail list logo
