On Tue, 16.06.15 15:51, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote: > Hi, > > I have noticed that glib vs sd-bus have different hierarchy in terms > of how objects are stacked. I don't have any argument why one or the > other one would be better but I was wondering what the reason for this > difference. > > "/com/a/b" registered with sd_bus_add_object_vtable > Introspection: > └─/com/a/b > > "/com/a/b" registered with glib > Introspection: > └─/com > └─/com/a > └─/com/a/b
Yeah, the spec says nothing about this. It's not clear whether "middle" nodes should be synthesized or not for cases like this. I decided to keep things minimal for sd-bus, and I think we should stay with that unless this turns out to be a real problem for something. Note though that the nodes in between actually are accessible if you use their path explicitly, they just aren't announced in the introspection, that's all. But maybe Simon has an opinion on this? Simon? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
