On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Kuzma Shapran <[email protected]> wrote:
> on Ubuntu libdconf1 depends on libc6 and libglib2.0-0. that's all
>
> BTW while checking dependencies of dconf I came across a `libdconf-qt0`:
>   Description: dconf Qt bindings (library)
>     This plugin provides dconf support for Qt applications. The Qt library
> shouldn't be used directly as there is no ABI and API stability guarantee.
>   Homepage: https://gitorious.org/dconf-qt
>
> Can it be helpful?
>
> Regards,
> Kuzma
>
>
> On 29 July 2013 20:54, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> mandag den 29. juli 2013 skrev PCMan :
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Александр Соколов <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > You understood me correctly.
>>> > Yet another one, is a events. Say, when razor-config-panel is changed
>>> > config, razor-panel should to know about this. Now we are using
>>> > QFileSystemWatcher (it use inotify), but this requires some
>>> > limitations.
>>> > With DBus we can use signals for notifications about changing of the
>>> > settings.
>>>
>>> Sriously, if we want:
>>>
>>> 1. dbus interface
>>> 2. dbus activition for the daemon on demand
>>> 3. change notifications
>>> 4. separated from the session manager
>>>
>>> Should we consider dconf?
>>> Dconf provides all of them, and is becoming the de facto standard
>>> gradually.
>>> Besides, it's more desktop neutral than creating our own lib.
>>> So other 3rd party programs can use it, too.
>>> It may be difficult to ask 3rd programs to link to our liblxqt or
>>> something.
>>> Though I personally prefer plain text config file over dconf, but it
>>> seems that we really need the features it provides.
>>> I discussed this with Jerome quite some time ago, and the conclusion
>>> was we don't touch it for now and keep using QSettings. However,
>>> during our ML discussions, it seems that dbus interface and change
>>> notifications are really wanted. So from existing implementations
>>> dconf is probably a candidate.
>>> If we're going to use it, we should encapsulate it in our own config
>>> class with different backends. One for QSettings, and another for
>>> dconf.
>>> So we don't need to touch implemantation details when using it and
>>> changing backends is possible.
>>>
>>> I'd like to have your opinions.
>>
>>
>> What I like about dconf: It's a standard, and it seems to do what we want.
>> What I don't like: It uses binary storage format. I'm an old and
>> old-fashioned person, and I like to be able to inspect stuff using cat or
>> less. But I guess that's the way the world is turning :-(.
>>
>> However, the dconf developers might argue that the binary format is
>> nessecary to get the read-speeds they (and we) want.
>>
>> All in all I think we should go the dconf way.
>>
>> So how to do it? We would still want to access settings in the code
>> through QSettings, and presumably, when dconf makes it's way into Qt, it
>> will be in the form of a new back-end for QSettings. So if we, for now,
>> create a subclass of QSettings, that replaces reading from files with calls
>> to dconf, we could use that in our applications, and we wouldn't have to
>> change very much once proper Qt-dconf-support is available.
>>
>> I've had a (very) cursory look at the dconf-api, and I think this is
>> possible.
>>
>> We could also create a clone of RazorSettings that inherits from this
>> QSettings-subclass (if we keep RazorSettings. I don't know if this is
>> settled)
>>
>> br. Chr.
>>
>> ps. There is one peculiarity: On Arch, where I live, dconf depends on
>> gtk-update-icon-cache. Maybe it's a packaging artifact. Do other distros
>> have the same dependency?

I believe that it's a packaging artifact.
What gtk-update-icon-cache does is simple.
It reads all image files in the specified icon theme, decompresses
them, and then writes the output to a single binary cache file.
Then, the binary cache can be used in gtk+ via mmap.
In that way, every gtk+ programs using the icon theme share the memory
usage of icons because it's a mmaped cache, hence reduce memory usage.
Qt does not support this cache, though.
So, it really has nothing to do with dconf.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics
Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics
Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds.
Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Lxde-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list

Reply via email to