[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde
Subject:    [kde] Automatic proxy configuration for KDE (cont.)
From:       Andy Teijelo =?iso-8859-1?q?P=E9rez?= <ateijelo () uh ! cu>
Date:       2005-07-12 16:29:15
Message-ID: 200507121229.16102.ateijelo () uh ! cu
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi again, list.
This is a continuation of a previous thread I started:
(http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde&m=112068508713262&w=2)

I'm cuban and because of hurricane Dennis, I had, until today, no chance to 
answer all of you guys that gave me some answers. As KMail erased several 
messages (yours among them) just a few minutes after they arrived (because of 
the Expiry feature, that found all those messages too old for the time when 
they arrived, but that's another story), I had to go to the list archives to 
read your messages, which I'll respond here.

Philip Rodrigues told me:
> Sounds reasonable - I think it's a bit unfair to expect apps to respond to
> changes in their config files without a restart of the app, or at least a
> SIGHUP. (Plus, it would change the behaviour of a running app if the config
> file was changed unexpectedly, which seems like a bad thing).

I was not expecting an immediate change in the application after the config 
file change, but I must have surely expressed myself wrong. English is not my 
natural language. After I changed the proxy settings config file, I ran 
"kbuildsycoca" and sent several dcop messages trying to make Konqueror aware 
of the change. And that didn't happen. I agree with you that it would be 
insane for an app to react immediately to a config file change (I can't even 
stand the GTK dialogs that have only a "Close" button and apply every change 
in the dialog immediately)

> Well, if it works for you, there's no problem :-). But on your point that
> there should be a GUI, I'd tend to disagree: your situation seems like an
> unusual one, and GUIs can't be expected to handle every single corner case.
> ICBW, though, so you might want to request such a GUI as a wishlist on
> bugs.kde.org - it might be easy to implement.

I'm also against the bloat that implementing every single feature ever wished 
brings. But, I think that this one could be nicely integrated in something 
like KPPP, that already have several per-connection settings, like DNS, IP, 
Gateway. It would be just another tab in that dialog with the proxy settings 
for that connection. A lower level, non GUI way to do it would also be nice, 
since I sometimes connect using pon/poff and these tools have nothing to do 
with KPPP. I'm sure that developers a lot more experienced than me could come 
up with an elegant and efficient solution that would also be easy to use for 
inexperienced users.

> You're welcome :-)
> Regards,
> Philip

Kevim Krammer said:

> Try this
> dcop $(dcopfind -a konqueror-*) KIO::Scheduler reparseSlaveConfiguration
> http 

Although I didn't know about dcopfind (which... wow, it's great), I did send 
that dcop message to the Konqueror instance I had opened, and it didn't work.
But, I have just tried it now and it works. I must have done something wrong 
the last time. Anyway, that's a Konqueror only solution. But I need Amarok, 
Akregator and maybe others to know about the change. Is there a way, using 
dcopfind or anything else, to find all open applications with a 
KIO::Scheduler object to send the message to?


> Another possibility might be to use the output of a script instead of a
> value  
> in the configuration file.
> KDE's config system supports that.
> Not sure though how often this would be evaluated.

Sorry, I didn't understand that. Would that be something like 
httpProxy=$(something) in ~/.kde/share/config/kioslaverc?

> I agree that some kind of connection profile managment would be useful.
> Both dial-up connection as well as wireless connections require more than
> just  
> a different IP/route/DNS entry at the system level.
> I think I read somewhere that the KDE PIM developers are discussion some
> kind  
> of connection state awareness for applications. Might fit into that.

Again, it would be nice to see something like that.

> Cheers,
> Kevin

David Goodenough said:

> Have you tried the proxy configuration script.  It is a piece of Javascript
> which gets run to determine the proxy for a given URL.  It is documented
> on the Mozilla site (look for .pac files) and these scripts are common
> across all the browsers including Konqueror.

Yeah, I tried that solution. But the script was olny ran once when the app 
started, or the dialog was opened, modified and Apply clicked.

> If you can not tell the difference between the proxy requirements given
> the limited functions available in the .pac file, then simply replace it
> with an ISP specific file.
> At this point you do need to tell Konqueror it has  
> changed (as the file is cached) and I am not sure how to do that 
> automatically, there might be a DCOP function to update it if not that
> would be a very reasonable feature request.

I think I didn't get it quite right here, but I think that the problem of 
making Konqueror aware of the change would remain.

> David

Well, guys, sorry again for this little inconvenience. I hope you'll answer.

Thanks for everything,
Andy.
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]