On 8/2/07, jamie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 18:16 +0200, Anders Rune Jensen wrote:
> > On 7/1/07, jamie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 16:24 +0200, Anders Rune Jensen wrote:
> > > > Updated patch available here:
> > > > http://people.iola.dk/anders/tracker-patches/win-changes.patch
> > > >
> > > > The new patch cleans up the changes quite a bit and moves win specific
> > > > code to a new file: tracker-os-dependant-win.c and unix specific code
> > > > to a new file tracker-os-dependant-unix.c. There's still a small
> > > > amount of ifdef's left but I don't think it's that much. There is some
> > > > code duplication between tracker-extract.c and trackerd/ files. It's
> > > > fixed cleanly in trackerd but I just ifdef'd it in tracker-extract.c.
> > > > Removing the duplication will fix this.
> > >
> > >
> > > Do you still want this in tracker?
> >
> > Sure :)
> >
> > > If so It will have to wait til after the next release (its quite a big
> > > patch and im a bit nervy about introducing new bugs just prior to
> > > releasing)
> > > It will also need updating but best wait until 0.6 is released first
> > >
> >
> > Yeah I waited 'till the new release was out to update the patch. I
> > have now updated and rolled all the patches needed into one patch
> > which can be found here:
> >
> > http://people.iola.dk/anders/tracker-patches/win-changes-0.60-all-in-one-revno-738.patch
>
>
> looks mostly ok but:
>
> +gboolean
> +check_uri(const char* uri)
> +{
> +  return uri != NULL && uri[0] != G_DIR_SEPARATOR_S;
> +}
>
> should that not be:
>
>  return uri != NULL && uri[0] == G_DIR_SEPARATOR_S;

Yeah. Good catch :)

> > > I would also like the dupication resolved if possible (not sure if
> > > haveing a tracker-common.c with a symlink to the other directory would
> > > work?)
> >
> > You mean the tracker_child_cb and the like that is also used in stuff
> > like tracker-extract? Because yeah some of that code was duplicated a
> > lot of places and introducing support for compiling on win32 just made
> > that worse ;-)
> >
> > Please let me know what you think.
>
> well you have omitted them for windows (in tracker-extract.c) which is
> fine
>
>
> will do some more testing to make sure nothing has been upset on unix
> before applying - thx

Cool. I've been testing the patch in windows and linux for a long time
back in about revno 540 and all has been good. But yes, it's a big
change, so better make sure I didn't introduce too many regressions.

-- 
Anders Rune Jensen
http://people.iola.dk/anders/
_______________________________________________
tracker-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-list

Reply via email to