On Monday 26 November 2007, Alexander Larsson wrote: > I would recomment to just fail the creation of the .trashinfo file and > still move the data file. Reading the trash can be done by reading the > data files, and if there is no related .trashinfo file we just have less > info about the file. A small feature regression for that file, but not a > huge problem really.
This means that when listing the contents of the trash we would have to list the files/ directory first, then list info/ like now, and while doing that mark the files as seen, and then we have the list of orphaned files (those not referenced from info/). Makes the implementation a bit more complex (right now I simply list info/), but I realize that this allows to handle a case that isn't handled at the moment, where something went wrong and a .trashinfo file is missing for any other reason (e.g. bugs :) ). OK then. Is someone updating the text in the spec to recommend handling the "disk full" and "no .trashinfo" cases correctly? -- David Faure, [EMAIL PROTECTED], sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org). _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
