HEADS UP: New gconf key policy

[John Merryweather Cooper]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 12:55:39AM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 00:49, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:54:30PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 23:00, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 09:20:25PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > > > > Please take a look at the latest update to archivers/fileroller, and let
> > > > > me know what you think.  This is the new gconf policy I think we need to
> > > > > adopt if we're to survive the upcoming gconf changes in GNOME 2.8 (it's
> > > > > similar to the way we handle OMF files now).  This will also make gconf
> > > > > handling much more robust with respect to plists.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The one downside I see with this is that we will miss Makefile bugs that
> > > > > prevent proper schema installation.  One way around that is to add a
> > > > > pkg-install script to each port that installs gconf schemas, and do
> > > > > gconf registration there.  This may be more work than it's worth,
> > > > > though.
> > > > > 
> > > > > What are people's thoughts on this?  Thanks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Joe
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
> > > > 
> > > > Well, there seems to be an increasing amount of post-install tasks in
> > > > GNOME ports, so I think the idiom of using a pkg-install script for
> > > > each port is a good one.
> > > 
> > > So far, there are only two (counting gconf) post-[de]install handlers
> > > that are being added the plists.  I've written an omf.pl script (in my
> > > CVS repo) to handle automatically adding OMF handlers.  I plan on doing
> > > the same for gconf.  Given that, a pkg-install script might add more
> > > repo bloat that we need at this time.
> > > 
> > > >   Turning to a design issue, do you see the
> > > > changes to gconf handling as making debugging of gconf-related
> > > > issues easier or harder.  I'm having a devil of a time wrestling an
> > > > update of comms/gfax into working order because of gconf issues.
> > > 
> > > I don't think it will make gconf issues any harder to troubleshoot. 
> > > Like I said, it will "mask" the problem we see occasionally when a
> > > developer messes up one of the Makefiles, and schemas are not properly
> > > installed.
> > > 
> > > What gconf problems are you having?
> > > 
> > > Joe
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > jmc
> > > > 
> > > -- 
> > > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
> > 
> > See attached patch to make comms/gfax into 0.6.0 (the gtk#) version.
> > 
> > Everything compiles and installs fine, but attempting to start gfax
> > gives errors about not being able to find two key values.  I'd be
> > more specific, but I'm rebuilding GNOME right now and so my X is
> > unavailable to me.
> 
> Well, this looks like a problem.  From the gfax root Makefile:
> 
> env GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE="" gconftool-2 --makefile-install-rule $(SCHEMA)
> 
> This should probably be:
> 
> GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=`gconftool-2 --get-default-source` gconftool-2
> --makefile-install-rule $(SCHEMA)
> 
> And of course, don't forget to install the schema file so you can remove
> the keys upon deinstall (something this application doesn't seem to do).
> 
> Joe
> 
> > 
> > jmc
> -- 
> PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc

I'll make those changes.  Interestingly, the line there was taken straight
from the original Makefile.  Is this a case of having a relocatable PREFIX
and the author of gfax assuming a given location (e.g., some default
locatin that results when GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE is set to ""?

jmc