Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 22:32, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > > >> On 28 Mar 2018, at 20:46, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 17:42 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >>> Somewhat OT, but hopefully informative in the context of

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 20:46, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > > On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 17:42 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> Somewhat OT, but hopefully informative in the context of this thread. >> >> >>> On 26 Mar 2018, at 18:24, Jonathon Jongsma

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 17:42 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > Somewhat OT, but hopefully informative in the context of this thread. > > > > On 26 Mar 2018, at 18:24, Jonathon Jongsma > > wrote: > > > > As teuf mentioned in a different email, std::runtime_error in

[Spice-devel] gstreamer for view/record spice session

Hi! Is it possible ro use gstreamer to view or record spice screen session? ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Make plugin version checking more robust

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:06:19PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > If my task is to "move version check to the agent", do I _have_ to change > > the semantics of the version check? No. > > Of course you have to. There is no “PluginVersionIsCompatible” > anymore, etc, so the version

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Make plugin version checking more robust

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 17:45, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:47:27AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >>> What matters in my opinion is that we decide to break it, once we've >>> made that decision, the number of commits which are going to make

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Ensure that plugins cannot bypass version check

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 17:20, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:10:36AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> >> >>> On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100,

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Make plugin version checking more robust

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:47:27AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > What matters in my opinion is that we decide to break it, once we've > > made that decision, the number of commits which are going to make ABI > > breaking changes is less important. > > Introducing “subtle” changes such

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

Somewhat OT, but hopefully informative in the context of this thread. > On 26 Mar 2018, at 18:24, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > > As teuf mentioned in a different email, std::runtime_error in C++11 has a > const char* constructor: Since the presence of this constructor was

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Ensure that plugins cannot bypass version check

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:10:36AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > > > On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > >> 2. ODR-related problems > >> > >> The C++ One

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 17:04, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:44:56PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> In my proposal, that message is built in format_message with something like: >> >> int written = snprintf(buffer, size, "%s writing %s

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:44:56PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > In my proposal, that message is built in format_message with something like: > > int written = snprintf(buffer, size, "%s writing %s for file ‘%s'", > what(), operation, filename.c_str()); > return

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> On 28 Mar 2018, at 13:12, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > >> Do you have something against requiring string constants in English for our >> error messages? >> >> Is it so difficult to understand that if I have: >> >> WriteError(“can’t write”, “header”, filename) >>

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> Do you have something against requiring string constants in English for our > error messages? > > Is it so difficult to understand that if I have: > > WriteError(“can’t write”, “header”, filename) > WriteError(“can’t write”, “boson”, filename) > > I can localize all the

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 12/22] Add exception handling classes

> On 26 Mar 2018, at 18:24, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 12:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> I realize I had left this one unanswered. >> >>> On 7 Mar 2018, at 15:14, Jonathon Jongsma >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed,

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Ensure that plugins cannot bypass version check

> On 26 Mar 2018, at 19:06, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:05:23PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> 2. ODR-related problems >> >> The C++ One Definition Rule (ODR) states that all translation units >> must see the same definitions. In the

Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Make plugin version checking more robust

> On 27 Mar 2018, at 10:56, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:28:24AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >> >> >>> On 27 Mar 2018, at 10:12, Christophe Fergeau wrote: >>> >>> With the right patch attached this time.. ;)

[Spice-devel] Build systems comparison

Following Eduardo’s sharing of his branch using Meson to build SPICE (https://gitlab.com/etrunko/spice/tree/meson), I ran some comparisons with the make-only build system I proposed late last year (https://github.com/c3d/spice/tree/c3d-build). First, in case you want to reproduce, a bit of