On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On Mar 03, 2014, at 02:50 AM, Alejandro J. Cura wrote: > > >You mention that you don't like the download manager doing the > >installation, but to put it more strictly: the download manager is > >actually just running a command given by the scope when a given > >download is completed. And the installation proper happens in that > >command. This is done, as you've explained, because the scope process > >may already be dead by the time that the download has finished, and > >the dash may not be showing the preview for the current download so > >it's not keeping track of the download progress and finished signals. > > It makes me uncomfortable for u-d-m to be running a command. In general, I > think u-d-m should have one job only: download files it's asked to > download. > > An that is precisely my concern.. I think we should focus in doing one thing very well. I much prefer to have several "stupid" services and a single one that orchestrates them than to have a mamouth service that does all of them with lots of bugs. > >If needed we can replace this with a dbus call that activates a > >process in a different security context; but I fail to see a problem > >yet with spawning a process from udm. Can you shed some more light on > >it? Moreover, I can't see how doing things differently would have > >prevented this specific bug. > > Sounds like Ted has a workable approach that's worth investigating. > > +1 at least it will simplify the picture we have atm related to testing. > -Barry > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
