tag 522729 pending thanks On sam, 2009-05-09 at 00:05 +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote: > On Fri, 08 May 2009 13:18:32 +0800 Chow Loong Jin wrote: > > > Digging through the ChangeLog of xfce4-notifyd reveals this: > > 2008-09-20 Brian J. Tarricone <bj...@cornell.edu> > > > > * xfce4-notifyd/xfce-notify-daemon.c: don't send the 2nd argument > > (close reason) with the NotificationClosed signal for some reason > > libnotify doesn't support it, so apps don't receive > > the signal. lovely. > > > > However, digging through libnotify's source code reveals this: > > static void > > _close_signal_handler(DBusGProxy *proxy, guint32 id, guint32 reason, > > NotifyNotification *notification) > > > > Although I haven't tested it, I would believe that libnotify does indeed > > support the 2nd argument, as of now. I think it would be a good idea to > > pass the close reason with the NotificationClosed signal now, at least > > in Debian and Ubuntu. > > Right, I installed banshee and reproduced your bug. After playing with > Corsac initial patch, I noticed that he somehow missed the point
… > and > fixed it :) Would you please test > http://die-welt.net/~evgeni/xfce4-notifyd_0.1.0-3_amd64.deb > and tell me that the bug is gone (it is for me). > > If it is, I'll ask upstream on his opinion and upload a fixed package I already asked upstream and they are a bit reluctant to change the code for now because it'll break for apps built against old libnotify. So until it's fixed upstream we'll ship a fixed package too (which I didn't upload because I was away for the weekend, but I'm not sure it couldn't wait :)) Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part