> Nit-picking: if no support for D-Bus is compiled *into the command
> line*, report one error ("support for --use-daemon not available in this
> binary"?). That may or may not be the same as having compiled the
> daemon. If the daemon fails to start, report that error.
Yes, you are right. Because command line and dbus server can be compiled
separately.
> Currently we only have --enable-dbus-service, which enables *building*
> syncevo-dbus-server. Should we enable support for *using* it with that
> same option? I think I prefer to keep it simple and use just one option.
You mean use '--enable-dbus-service [yes/no]' in the command line option? Yes,
I think it's a good suggestion. It means 'enabling dbus service usage in the
command
line'.
Cheers,
Yongsheng
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ohly, Patrick
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 5:15 PM
> To: Zhu, Yongsheng
> Cc: David Bremner; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [SyncEvolution] syncevo-dbus-server and command line client
>
> On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 07:29 +0000, Zhu, Yongsheng wrote:
> > > Your comment about syncevo-dbus-server being compiled, but not installed
> > > implies that the default should better do a runtime check, something
> > > like:
> > > --use-daemon[=yes/no] run operations in cooperation with the
> > > background sync daemon; enabled by default
> if
> > > it is installed
> > So this option is used in the runtime command line arguments.
> > I summarize up below behaviors:
> > If the option is explicitly set by user with value 'yes', then if the
> > daemon is compiled, try to use it. Otherwise, report an error.
>
> Nit-picking: if no support for D-Bus is compiled *into the command
> line*, report one error ("support for --use-daemon not available in this
> binary"?). That may or may not be the same as having compiled the
> daemon. If the daemon fails to start, report that error.
>
> Currently we only have --enable-dbus-service, which enables *building*
> syncevo-dbus-server. Should we enable support for *using* it with that
> same option? I think I prefer to keep it simple and use just one option.
>
> --
> Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
>
> The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
> I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
> represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
> on behalf of Intel on this matter.
>
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
