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

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: KIO/KHTML Error Handling Update
From:       Dirk Mueller <mueller () kde ! org>
Date:       2002-01-27 15:11:55
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Hamish Rodda wrote:

> 1) define more specific error codes, in addition to the current list, or
> 2) require the ioslave to use ERR_SLAVE_DEFINED for the more obscure errors. I 
> think this error will define errorText to be a % separated list of 
> description, causes and solutions, to be compatible with the current scheme.
 
3) allow the slave to customize the advises / causes. 

> Here's where my brain wasn't turned on. I was under the impression that the 
> translators had about a month before the release, ie. I was thinking it only 
> had to be done in time for the final release :(  I think I got this idea from 
> the no-new-i18n-commits after RC1.

This is correct. But usually translators do want to have the important 
strings translated. and adding a set of "new" strings just before release 
will leave it in an unfinished state for them, so Beta2 will not be fully 
translated in important parts - which doesn't make them happy. Everybody who 
is using beta2 will see these messageboxes quite often - and they're now not 
translated anymore. Some of our users will not understand the english 
fallback messages, so this is a showstopper for them. 

> * I could add a i18n( "TRANSLATORS: delete this string if you have translated 
> these error messages" ), and fall back to the pre-existing, translated error 
> messages if it is still length() > 1. I guess the extraction would have to be 
> re-run however. 

That would screw up everything. Don't. 

> >- claiming its a hardware failure.
> yes, that's gone in most of the cases in the latest patch, except for when a 
> read or write failed, where the string details that it is an unlikely event.

Did you ever have a full disk ? or use NFS ? 

> >- claiming that starting konqueror as root will help in any way
> These are cases where root privileges have a significant chance of being 
> required, and it is explained why that is the case (low port numbers) and 
> that it should only be done if the security implications are understood. I 
> would expect these error messages to be rare though.

Do we support IOslaves that run as root ? I don't think so, as the KIO 
interface works per user. so a slave started as root would have problems 
communicating with a user application. 

Is this something new required by WebDAV ?

> I removed most of these and the rest will be determined from the protocol file 
> flag about whether it was a remote/network service or not.

Still, there can be 100 more reasons than just the remote server being down. 
it can be your internet connection, it can be a router between you and the 
remote host, it can be that the remote host blocked your IP, that the remote 
host is temporary overloaded and responds slowly. I don't think the 
administrator of the remote system wants to know about it. 

I think we should only give advises that would help immediately in _this_ 
situation, like "increasing the timeout value" if it is a timeout error, as 
David pointed out. 

> I will check through for that. I will put the refreshes in however it will 
> have to wait until the error routine knows which job it was performing. 
> Refreshing only really makes sense for http get, and probably a few other 
> protocols' gets aswell.

Refreshing simply means "lets try it again". retrying is a common way (the 
most common on windows btw) to get rid of an error. Therefore, a slave that 
does not support doing the same operation again is simply broken. 


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