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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: resurrecting kwrited
From:       Oswald Buddenhagen <ossi () kde ! org>
Date:       2008-10-13 11:51:23
Message-ID: 20081013115123.GA24678 () troll08
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 01:25:35AM +0300, George Kiagiadakis wrote:
> The master branch contains some minor improvements and code cleanups.
> 
054d8a404da937f9e0e5fdf0ef189114ed10b812
- no point in checking for <= 0 in block_in(), you'd get different
  signals
- readAll() instead of the arbitrary size read
why do you bother with the much bigger higher-level class if you don't
use any of its features anyway? ;)
- see http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/Common_Programming_Mistakes#Reading_QString_from_a_KProcess
 see kdm/kfrontend/kconsole.cpp:slotData()

18c79315a8bfa2566a6744cb7b8e521183d9d1c0
- this is actually a bit silly. the tty output should be probably a
  shorter, not internationalized qWarning()

7f8825dff376b5df7f5fbd8afa298a29f7084d04
- hmpf. this is bad bad bad. oh, well.

9f9be009ba0c74ab667531a6cbfc3bbd2454ab11
- two remove()s with single chars would be *way* faster than the regexp

d8e38b9b05b274b36032ca7acdc96cfad99f3b27
- misfeature, imho

> The knotify branch introduces the feature to use KNotify instead of
> popping up the kwrited window on every new message. [...]
> I thought it would be better to drop completely the kwrited window and
> use ONLY knotify. What do you think of that? 
> 
reasonable.

> The no-utempter branch introduces a workaround to my problem. [...]
> 
i think we already talked about that on irc?
hmm, that's interesting - KApplication lost its "i refuse to run with
setuid/setgid" feature on the way to kde 4. so the rest of my thoughts
on that matter becomes a bit irrelevant. anyway:
- it sucks to repeat the utempter check for every use case. we need some
  global flag KPtyNeedsSetGid which can be used in cmakefiles. or simply
  a cmake postinstall macro apply_kpty_setgid_utmp() which is possibly a
  noop
- KPty should handle restoring privs for login() and dropping them again
  automatically. libkpty would have a global constructor to drop the
  privs on startup in the first place.

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Confusion, chaos, panic - my work here is done.
 
> > Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<


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