skalinichev added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983#114146, @aacid wrote:
> I find this impolite, it was on my queue for reviewing properly, just i
have had a very busy week.
Ah, sorry for the misunderstanding, I simply thought that you didn't care
about it anymore
aacid added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983#113988, @skalinichev wrote:
> In https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983#113975, @aacid wrote:
>
> > Did you commit this on purpose without the review being accepted or was
it a mistake?
>
>
> Yeah, I did it on purpose since:
skalinichev added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983#113975, @aacid wrote:
> Did you commit this on purpose without the review being accepted or was it
a mistake?
Yeah, I did it on purpose since:
1. It was on review long enough (more than a week), so anyone who w
aacid added a comment.
Did you commit this on purpose without the review being accepted or was it a
mistake?
REPOSITORY
R283 KAuth
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983
To: skalinichev
Cc: aacid, #frameworks
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit R283:ada2dc24381b: Check error status after every
PolKitAuthority usage (authored by skalinichev).
REPOSITORY
R283 KAuth
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983?vs=14908&id=15127
R
skalinichev added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983#112386, @aacid wrote:
> Have you had these errors happen to you?
>
> How can one reproduce them?
>
> Or is it more of a "this should be the right code but i don't know how to
trigger it" case?
Yes, for me it
aacid added a comment.
Have you had these errors happen to you?
How can one reproduce them?
Or is it more of a "this should be the right code but i don't know how to
trigger it" case?
REPOSITORY
R283 KAuth
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983
To: skalinichev
Cc: a
skalinichev added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
> aacid wrote in Polkit1Backend.cpp:220
> This seems a bit weird since we have done nothing with authority here, so how
> would it have an error?
Thinking a bit more about it, it can actually happen if enumerateActions call
failed.
REPOSITORY
skalinichev updated this revision to Diff 14908.
REPOSITORY
R283 KAuth
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983?vs=14871&id=14908
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D5983
AFFECTED FILES
src/backends/polkit-1/Polkit1Backend.cpp
To: skalinichev
Cc: aacid, #fra
skalinichev added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
> aacid wrote in Polkit1Backend.cpp:220
> This seems a bit weird since we have done nothing with authority here, so how
> would it have an error?
Well yes it shouldn't happen now with the two other checks above. This check
here just in case (t
aacid added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
> Polkit1Backend.cpp:220
> +auto authority = PolkitQt1::Authority::instance();
> +if (authority->hasError()) {
> +qWarning() << "Encountered error while enumerating actions, error
> code:" << authority->lastError() << authority->errorD
skalinichev created this revision.
Restricted Application added a project: Frameworks.
REVISION SUMMARY
Otherwise if some error occurred in e.g. checkAuthorizationSync call,
enumerateActions call would also fail (as PolKitAuthority already set error
flag internally)
REPOSITORY
R283 KAuth
R
12 matches
Mail list logo
