El dissabte, 13 de maig de 2017, a les 14:00:15 CEST, David Faure va escriure: > On lundi 8 mai 2017 17:51:06 CEST Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > El dilluns, 8 de maig de 2017, a les 17:32:35 CEST, David Faure va escriure: > > > On lundi 8 mai 2017 16:14:47 CEST Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > > > I think the point is that we *want* the notification to happen after > > > > > restartDirScan, in the cases where stopDirScan/restartDirScan is > > > > > used. > > > > > > > > No, we actually have a test that proves that we get to signal after > > > > restartDirScan is enabled again > > > > > > That's what I'm saying yes. We want the notification to happen, and it > > > happens. > > > > Sorry, typo, "to signal" is "no signal", since you don't want to open the > > test i'll copy the code here > > Ah sorry. I didn't see the need to read the test since I was agreeing with > your sentence due to the typo ;) > > > QCOMPARE(spyDirty.count(), 0); // as documented by restartDirScan: no > > signal > OK, the docu says we expect the app to have taken care of updating the view > by other means. > > We could re-evaluate this, but... > > The use of restartDirScan in KIO (CopyJob and DeleteJob) actually does NOT > need restartDirScan to emit anything, since CopyJob takes care of notifying > about changes using DBus (KDirNotify). > Additional signals would just slow things down. In fact this is the only > reason why KIO uses restartDirScan in the first place. > > The fact that inotify breaks that is therefore a bug in my view. > i.e. I agree with the original post. > > The question is whether it's fixable...
Let me repeat my original question: Should we simply mark stopDirScan as deprecated and make it call removeDir? removeDir works and yes, it may be "a bit slower", but it works :D Cheers, Albert