Sayamindu Dasgupta wrote: > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As we all know, latest joyride can't launch activities. Chris Ball >> pointed out that disabling rainbow solves the issue. >> >> The problem is that the sugar module imports try to read the XO >> nickname, colours, etc, information which is now stored in gconf. But, >> gconf is a per-user thing, everyone has their own store. Rainbow >> launches activities as different users, so with the default behaviour >> we cannot expect activities to be able to access sugar's >> configuration. >> >> Potential workaround: set ORBIT_SOCKETDIR=/tmp/orbit-olpc in rainbow, >> and loosen permissions on /tmp/orbit-olpc/* >> This works, but causes gconf to complain loudly that /tmp/orbit-olpc >> is not owned by the current user (i.e. the one running the activity) >> >> Tomeu raised the point that GConf2-dbus would solve this, as it >> provides a per-session-bus settings repository, rather than a per-user >> one. Rainbow already shares the session bus between olpc user and >> activities. We actually shipped GConf2-dbus in 8.1, but dropped it for >> 8.2 because at the time, nobody could offer an explanation of why we >> might need or want it. >> Switching back to GConf2-dbus does raise some questions though: >> >> - It looks like a dead project. Not updated since 2.16.0. Do we want >> to be burdened with it? >> miraculously, it compiles and works fine after a BuildRequires tweak: >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=946380 >> - This still raises questions about our security model, IMO. Rainbow >> prevents activities from messing with 'the rest of the system.' But if >> we let activities access gconf, they can screw up any application that >> stores information there (e.g. sugar). >> - and the above point raises the possibility of a per-activity gconf >> store, with associated gconf daemon, but this adds about 2mb memory >> usage per activity... >> > > > IIRC, the reason we wanted Gconf Dbus was that we wanted to avoid the > dependency on Orbit and the rest of the stuff that it pulls in. Is > there any reason to do otherwise at the moment ? I think upstream > GNOMe has also plans to switch to GConf Dbus[1], but I'm not sure > when. The maemo guys seem to be using GConf Dbus as well. > Thanks, > Sayamindu > > > > [1] http://projects.gnome.org/gconf/plans.html
We use gconf-dbus as well in sugar-jhbuild to be able to run several instances (SUGAR_PROFILE=sayamindu2 sugar-emulator) Best, Simon _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar