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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: device-automounter moved to kdereview
From:       Jacopo De Simoi <wilderkde () gmail ! com>
Date:       2009-11-04 8:09:22
Message-ID: 200911040909.22339.wilderkde () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 04 November 2009 03:30:47 Trever Fischer wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 November 2009 10:55:25 am Jacopo De Simoi wrote:
> > > > Also, imho the informations should be refreshed even if it's already
> > > > present in the .rc file whenever possible; besides; who is responsible
> > > > to fill in the devices in the .rc file? the daemon I suppose; would it
> > > > be possible to save the pretty name we have found for our device at the
> > > > daemon level? so that whenever you connect the drive, the user would
> > > > find it with its pretty name in the disconnected devices node as well.
> > > > Having it set up at the daemon level could make the kcm part merely
> > > > read it from the .rc since it will be automagically updated.
> > > 
> > > It does that. The only reason for having the code to generate a name is
> > > for the condition where a new device is plugged in and the daemon hasn't
> > > written the name to the .rc yet. I'm sure there's a much better way
> > > involving dbus signals or using dbus to just ask the daemon for the list
> > > of devices.
> > 
> > /me should remember to relogin when recompiling a kded module
> > My apologies :)
> > 
> > It seems that, thanks to Albert now we can just use dev.description() and
> > forget about adding the size ourselves; also it seems sane that, since the
> > naming method is shared by daemon and kcm, it should be put in the
> > automounterSettings as well (and don't forget to add the icon-name to the
> > rc as well ;)
> Really? I don't seem to see anything in SVN about this. But I'll keep it as 
> description() for now since it seems to make sense that I shouldn't be messing 
> around with the hierarchy to find a 'human friendly' name.
imho we should still provide parent.vendor() and parent.product(); if you see a pile of "xxGb \
hard disk" in the disconnected devices list it's hard to distinguish one from the other. 
Besides, since the parent of the volume (/dev/sdax) is pretty much always the device itself \
(/dev/sda), I don't see a problem in using information from it.

Regards
 --J


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