On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 01:32 +0200, Clemens Buss wrote:
> Ok, if GEmblemableIcon is great english, I don't know either ;-).
As long as the accompanying documentation displays excellent English, I
must say I don't care that "emblemable" represents incorrect use of
aforementioned language :)
Of co
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 12:55 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 13:51 +0200, bronson wrote:
> > could anyone tell me how can I hide window, when user minimizes it?
> > I tried to handle signal 'window-state-event', but when in that method i
> > hide window,
> > strange things ha
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 10:57 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 03:33 -0500, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > I'm aware of the dangers - when I worked on Evolution, this caused
> > plenty of pain.
> >
> > However, it's useful in very simple
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 09:30 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 14:08 -0500, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > In Flow, I keep a GMainContext associated with each GThread. The API
> > user can set his own GMainContext for each thread, but for simplicity it
>
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 09:24 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 17:52 +0200, Benjamin Otte wrote:
> > Yeah, I missed those implementations as I was only grepping for
> > GMainContext which you don't use.
> > I think it's a good idea to make the main context customizable so gvfs
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 17:03 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> I've found myself wanting GObject derived GList. The idea is to have a
> "list of things with some GType", and make the API which modifies that
> list emit "changed", "deleted", "inserted" signals, etc. I coded a
> GObject derived class to
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 12:33 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> I am posting to suggest that glib has crossed a threshold
> of size and functionality and that users would benefit from
> a splitting of the library into two or more separate libraries.
>
> [...]
>
> The growth in size and in dependencies
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 19:40 +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> I propose a replacement of the current gtk stock icons with newly
> created artwork[1]. The set uses the exact same metaphors so it's
> unlikely to cause any trouble with applications using the icons in a
> slightly changed context. It has
On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 15:54 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 07:37 +0100, Alex Jones wrote:
> > A few years ago there used to be a distributor patch in Gentoo to enable
> > this, and it was sweet. What happened, here?
> I dunno, but it's more than sweet. Whoever remember the te
On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 06:46 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:19:22 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > Also, the last time I checked, valgrind would only let you suppress
> > messages about invalid accesses, not leaked memory.
> No, it definitely allows suppr
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 21:10 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > If it's cached, shouldn't it still be reachable?
> valgrind has a (mostly useless) mode that shows reachable-but-not-freed
> blocks.
Yes, but then it says "still reachab
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 20:57 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 20:40 +0100, Rúben Fonseca wrote:
> > > So my question is, is g_get_user_config_dir really leaking? Or it is
> > > just a Valgrind problem? Can I make it not to leak?
>
> Looking up entries in the password database (that
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:28 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 14:18 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> > Perhaps we need another variable in the specification mentioned, such
> > as XDG_MOUNT_HOME that defaults to ~/.local/mount or similar.
> I really think we should default to
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:13 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 15:03 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 09:30 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > > So, when the app reads the data for recent files and stats it, or does
> &
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 10:45 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 15:11 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > Which protocols don't require a server address? Which don't require a
> > path relative to the server? If none, will such realistically exist
On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 14:18 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> I agree with both of you.
>
> Perhaps we need another variable in the specification mentioned, such
> as XDG_MOUNT_HOME that defaults to ~/.local/mount or similar.
>
> I figured I'd at least mention it so that we thought all aspects of
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 10:56 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 17:44 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > So I guess our default would be ~/.local/share/vfs/ ?
> XDG_DATA_HOME is basically the user-specific version of /usr/share/. You
> don't mount your
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 09:16 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 14:22 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > I suppose
> >
> > ~/.vfs/smb:$server:$share/dir/file.txt:option=$value:option=$value
> You mean
> ~/.vfs/smb:$server:$share:option=$value
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 09:30 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 14:51 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > That's a good point. To make that suck less, you'd probably have to
> >
> > - Immediately deny any access to unmounted shares.
> >
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 22:26 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 2/22/07, Hans Petter Jansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ~/.mounts/type=smb-share;server=$server;share=$share/dir/file.txt
> I just want to point out that there's a freedesktop specification for
> whe
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 14:44 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 13:49 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 10:33 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > As a further example of this I tried OSX. It has a system similar to the
> > first proposal. I.E. When you m
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 13:51 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 12:38 +, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> > You're probably always going to need type, server and share though, so
> > maybe you can make it a bit more readable:
> >
> > ~/.mounts/smb:$server:$share/dir/file.txt
> >
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 12:38 +, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 03:10 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > However, the first method you describe:
> >
> > ~/.mounts/type=smb-share;server=$server;share=$share/dir/file.txt
> >
> > sounds perfec
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 09:24 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
[Snip]
> In general, the way mountpoints work in unix is that they are mounted
> over *one* directory, and don't mix things up with other mounts, so I
> think the best solution would be to have each mountpoint be one
> subdirectory under
On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 16:54 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> In general I think that we will still use URIs to pass file references
> between apps when doing things like DnD, cut-and-paste or when saving
> filenames in config files. It seems hard to change this at this time,
> and it has some adv
On Sat, 2007-02-17 at 02:52 +0100, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
> Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > - Some methods names hardly suggest the semantics of the operation.
> > For example:
> >
> > void g_sequence_move (GSequenceIter*src,
> >
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 20:59 +0100, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
> Yes, I think the implementation can be changed without API changes.
>
> If at some point we implement the aggregates that Jonathan mentioned
> it would make a lot of sense to also move to a red/black or a btree at
> the same time, since
On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 01:50 +0100, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
> Hans Petter Jansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't think more robust iterators are worth the overhead for this data
> > structure, but would you consider calling them items instead of
> > it
On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 03:01 +0100, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
> A long time ago I wrote GSequence for the purpose of speeding up
> Nautilus, which at the time was spending large amounts of maintaining
> sorted lists of file. GSequence is a data structure that implements
> the API of a list, but repres
On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 22:00 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've tied this, and also G_DEBUG=gc-friendly
>
> The reality is that gtk is leaking.
> it's not just a matter of there being a pointer that wasn't cleared.
> valgrind is reporting actual malloced memory that hasn't been freed.
Nobody'
On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 14:11 +, Ross Burton wrote:
> GTK+ internally uses GSlice, which means you'll see lots of fake leaks.
> Set G_SLICE=always-malloc when starting valgrind, and they'll probably
> disappear.
It's a good idea to use G_DEBUG=gc-friendly too, especially if you're
looking for l
On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 19:10 +0100, Paweł wrote:
> I would like to ask you to visit this topic on gnome-look.org:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=48820
>
> Sorry for my english, which may not be so good, but I'm keen on graphics
> and during working in Gnome I see many things in G
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 02:49 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 09:30:17PM -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 22:28 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 08:55:49PM -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> &g
On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 22:28 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 08:55:49PM -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > I seriously doubt that GStringChunk is useful, because the gain from
> > using non-aligned memory is lost if your strings don't fit the bloc
On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 12:46 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> There has been some recent discussion in evolution-hackers over the
> value of GStringChunk in GLib. Jeff provided a pretty good analysis of
> its pitfalls [1], leaving me to wonder whether its continued use is
> still encouraged.
>
> I'
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 09:06 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 19:01 -0400, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 13:14 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > > The way I had planned this was to always use true async i/o when talking
> >
On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 13:14 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 11:40 +0200, Tim Janik wrote:
> > hm, in your initial proposal, you said that apps don't currently have
> > control
> > over whether they want to use/care about threading or not. so, are you
> > planning for a way
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 10:07 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 16:24 -0400, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > Of course, not all applications need such functionality, but that's
> > just a matter of wrapping this in a higher-level, more rigid API.
> In m
First off, thanks for starting this debate. It looks like gnome-vfs is
in for an awesome overhaul. Some comments on streams below.
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 18:12 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> I've been doing some initial sketching of the glib API, and I've
> started by introducing base GInputStr
't think something like this belongs there.
--
Hans Petter Jansson | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Novell, Inc. Hacker | http://hp.cl.no/
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
40 matches
Mail list logo
