On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 19:48:18 +0300% Dimitar Zhekov dimitar.zhekov@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 11:51:18 +0400 Eugene Arshinov earshinov@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:48:15 +0300% Dimitar Zhekov dimitar.zhekov@gmail.com wrote:
- On my system your version do not automatically remove
temporary SM-related session files. Is it supposed to do so? I saw that you specified DiscardCommand.
They are removed when a program ceases to be part of the session (i.e. when you close an instance), not on session restart or something.
But even if I open Geany and immediately close it, its temporary file is still there. I just checked out that the file still exists even after I logout and login again (i.e., after GNOME session manager is restarted).
Well, under xfce-sm they are deleted as soon as the geany instance is closed (xfce has some other bugs though). With GNOME, a lot of the session management is implemented in it's session client library. The best and most compliant XSM is that of KDE4.
And easier way to test than installing KDE is to temporarily disable the GNOME SM and use xsm(1). It's not suitable for practical work, but should be enough to try the creation/deletion of the .conf files.
Thanks, I'll try that.
(On that note, I don't think it's necessary for you to try guessing the absolute name of args[0], every program I've seen just stores argv[0] directly.)
I checked that relative paths do not work, even if SmCurrentDirectory is properly set. Ordinary users rarely run programs using relative paths, but still.
With xfce, and SmCurrentDirectory specified, they are OK. As of GNOME... *sigh* I don't like to be harsh, but it has the worst XSM support, especially for non-gnome programs, and always had. Instead of fixing it, they finally replaced XSMP with a D-Bus based protocol at the end of 2008.
Yes, I heard about it.
So if you feel like writing support for it... I do not.
No, I don't like it, but there are some GNOME users out there :)
There are some other fixes, I can send a patch against 5064 if you want.
Yes, that would be good. I have an idea of combining your SM implementation with my sm branch (you know the branch now contains plenty of things apart of SM, e.g. changes in command-line handling, Geany session management, [...] If I finally do it, I'll send here resulting patch(es).
Attached. To prevent an unlikely race condition, the "Build -> Set build commands" settings should be saved on OK response, instead of when exiting Geany, but I believe your sm branch includes that.
Okay, thanks.