On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:56:03AM +0200, Martijn Klingens wrote:
> On Monday 10 October 2005 00:13, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > i think simon meant that the objects representing the different "hop
> > stages" are not really processes (in the OS sense), they are
> > in-process filters. only the most nested filter talks to a "real"
> > (local) process.
> 
> True. In fact, technically it doesn't even have to. The only reason I
> use the ssh and su executables is because I don't feel like
> reinventing wheels, but if one wants to write, say, a telnet
> implementation using KDE's socket classes, why not?
> 
hmm, how about that:
 class QAbstractProcess : public QIODevice;
 class QProcess : public QAbstractProcess;
 class KExtProcess : public QAbstractProcess;
i didn't really think it through; it's just an idea. i guess that would
be qt5 anyway.

> If there's anything interesting or revolutionary, please do inform me.
> Also I would like to receive a heads-up when you think the K4Process
> API starts stabilizing,
> 
sure

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.