HEADS UP: New gconf key policy

[Joe Marcus Clarke]

On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 00:49, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:54:30PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 23:00, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 09:20:25PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > > > Please take a look at the latest update to archivers/fileroller, and let
> > > > me know what you think.  This is the new gconf policy I think we need to
> > > > adopt if we're to survive the upcoming gconf changes in GNOME 2.8 (it's
> > > > similar to the way we handle OMF files now).  This will also make gconf
> > > > handling much more robust with respect to plists.
> > > > 
> > > > The one downside I see with this is that we will miss Makefile bugs that
> > > > prevent proper schema installation.  One way around that is to add a
> > > > pkg-install script to each port that installs gconf schemas, and do
> > > > gconf registration there.  This may be more work than it's worth,
> > > > though.
> > > > 
> > > > What are people's thoughts on this?  Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > Joe
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
> > > 
> > > Well, there seems to be an increasing amount of post-install tasks in
> > > GNOME ports, so I think the idiom of using a pkg-install script for
> > > each port is a good one.
> > 
> > So far, there are only two (counting gconf) post-[de]install handlers
> > that are being added the plists.  I've written an omf.pl script (in my
> > CVS repo) to handle automatically adding OMF handlers.  I plan on doing
> > the same for gconf.  Given that, a pkg-install script might add more
> > repo bloat that we need at this time.
> > 
> > >   Turning to a design issue, do you see the
> > > changes to gconf handling as making debugging of gconf-related
> > > issues easier or harder.  I'm having a devil of a time wrestling an
> > > update of comms/gfax into working order because of gconf issues.
> > 
> > I don't think it will make gconf issues any harder to troubleshoot. 
> > Like I said, it will "mask" the problem we see occasionally when a
> > developer messes up one of the Makefiles, and schemas are not properly
> > installed.
> > 
> > What gconf problems are you having?
> > 
> > Joe
> > 
> > > 
> > > jmc
> > > 
> > -- 
> > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
> 
> See attached patch to make comms/gfax into 0.6.0 (the gtk#) version.
> 
> Everything compiles and installs fine, but attempting to start gfax
> gives errors about not being able to find two key values.  I'd be
> more specific, but I'm rebuilding GNOME right now and so my X is
> unavailable to me.

Well, this looks like a problem.  From the gfax root Makefile:

env GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE="" gconftool-2 --makefile-install-rule $(SCHEMA)

This should probably be:

GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=`gconftool-2 --get-default-source` gconftool-2
--makefile-install-rule $(SCHEMA)

And of course, don't forget to install the schema file so you can remove
the keys upon deinstall (something this application doesn't seem to do).

Joe

> 
> jmc
-- 
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/attachments/20040624/12b9d585/attachment.bin