12:42 p.m.
What launches notification-daemon in F15? dbus? And why is it not
started in F16 any longer?
The LXDE spin has no notifications and I'm wondering when/why this has
changed.
Regards,
Christoph
5:18 a.m.
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 19:42:48 +0200
Christoph Wickert wrote:
What launches notification-daemon in F15? dbus? And why is it not
started in F16 any longer?
The LXDE spin has no notifications and I'm wondering when/why this has
changed.
FYI, now that you mentioned it I discovered in my F15 it does not
auto-start either (XFCE)...
Regards,
Christoph
Regards,
Martin
5:42 a.m.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Martin Sourada
<martin.sourada(a)gmail.com>wrote:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 19:42:48 +0200
Christoph Wickert wrote:
> What launches notification-daemon in F15? dbus? And why is it not
> started in F16 any longer?
>
> The LXDE spin has no notifications and I'm wondering when/why this has
> changed.
>
FYI, now that you mentioned it I discovered in my F15 it does not
auto-start either (XFCE)...
> Regards,
> Christoph
>
Regards,
Martin
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
I think there was an autostart file for it not so long ago, I remember
seeing it on my F15 machine. But I can't seem to find it on both my f16 and
f15 machines, which is strange.
I don't remember what provided that file... I can't seem to find it in thee
notification-daemon package git, so it's probably not there.
Anyway, you should add notification-daemon.desktop to the autostart
directory, but make sure that it only starts when needed (ie. when not using
gnome-shell).
I think there was even a thread about it in this list, which said that every
desktop should take care of loading the notification-daemon on it's own.
--
-Elad Alfassa.
6:26 a.m.
Am Montag, den 24.10.2011, 12:42 +0200 schrieb Elad:
Anyway, you should add notification-daemon.desktop to the autostart
directory, but make sure that it only starts when needed (ie. when not
using gnome-shell).
This is on the package maintainers to do it, that's why I ask here.
I think there was even a thread about it in this list, which said
that
every desktop should take care of loading the notification-daemon on
it's own.
Nope, that was policykit agents, not notification daemons.
Regards,
Christoph
7:23 a.m.
On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 13:26 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Montag, den 24.10.2011, 12:42 +0200 schrieb Elad:
> I think there was even a thread about it in this list, which
said that
> every desktop should take care of loading the notification-daemon on
> it's own.
Nope, that was policykit agents, not notification daemons.
notification-daemon is in the same boat. Fwiw, it's been like this since
before F15:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/notification-daemon/commit/?id=1ad20d22098bc7...
11:11 a.m.
Am Montag, den 24.10.2011, 08:23 -0400 schrieb Matthias Clasen:
On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 13:26 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Montag, den 24.10.2011, 12:42 +0200 schrieb Elad:
> > I think there was even a thread about it in this list, which said that
> > every desktop should take care of loading the notification-daemon on
> > it's own.
>
> Nope, that was policykit agents, not notification daemons.
notification-daemon is in the same boat.
Hi Matthias,
thanks for the answer and pointing me to the commit.
Fwiw, it's been like this since before F15:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/notification-daemon/commit/?id=1ad20d22098bc7...
I have to admit I missed it and a heads-up to the maintainers of the
affected packages would have been nice.
While I do understand that GNOME no longer used dbus to start it, I
still don't understand why the desktop file was moved to another
package.
We now receive complainants that notification-daemon no longer works in
Xfce or LXDE. To fix this, we need to install a copy of the desktop file
and mark it OnlyShowIn=Xfce or OnlyShowIn=LXDE. The same applies to
polkit-gnome. This means we end up with 8 desktop [1] files where we
previously only had 3 and still don't cover all combinations.
I don't see any improvement over the previous situation, instead I see
some regressions:
* users are still not free to decide for themselves what
notification daemon of polkit agent they want to run. In fact
they are more unfree than before.
* users of desktop display managers are no longer able to run
polkit applications and receive notifications. We'd require
another set of desktop files for each WM and this obviously
doesn't scale.
* I have to maintain 2 patched packages and so have many other
maintainers.
The only 'improvement' is that it's no longer your problem. I don't
understand why you had to apply this change when all it required was
some coordination between 3 package maintainers to agree on a sane set
of defaults. I made a working proposal for this [2].
Long story short: What do you suggest I should tell the people who
complain. They have asked what component they should file bugs against.
Are you ok with notification-daemon and polkit-gnome?
Regards,
Christoph
[1] polkit-gnome and notification-daemon in gnome-session, both
notification-daemons and polkit agents in xfce4-session and 2 files in
lxsession
[2]
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-April/134578.html
11:46 a.m.
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 18:11 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Long story short: What do you suggest I should tell the people who
complain. They have asked what component they should file bugs against.
Are you ok with notification-daemon and polkit-gnome?
Depends on what outcome you expect. You can certainly file bugs against
notification-daemon, but I don't see the autostart file coming back.
I don't think 'number of desktop files' is the thing we should be
optimizing, and shared autostart files for desktop infrastructure are
just a recipe for avoidable conflicts. All the OnlyShowIn and NotShowIn
hackery is just treating the symptoms.
Matthias
6:58 p.m.
Am Dienstag, den 15.11.2011, 12:46 -0500 schrieb Matthias Clasen:
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 18:11 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
> Long story short: What do you suggest I should tell the people who
> complain. They have asked what component they should file bugs against.
> Are you ok with notification-daemon and polkit-gnome?
Depends on what outcome you expect.
Hi Matthias,
my hope is to fix the problems for our users, this means less complains
and bug reports.
You can certainly file bugs against
notification-daemon, but I don't see the autostart file coming back.
This means we would have to file bugs against *all* window and session
managers because ATM we are leaving a lot of people without any support
for policykit or notifications, which is a pretty massive regression
compared to F14.
I don't think 'number of desktop files' is the thing we
should be
optimizing, and shared autostart files for desktop infrastructure are
just a recipe for avoidable conflicts. All the OnlyShowIn and NotShowIn
hackery is just treating the symptoms.
I understand your point and I agree it's just treating symptoms, but I
think that a proper use of OnlyShowIn and NotShowIn could fix most of
the problems - if we agree on a common set. Of course I am open to
suggestions, but so far I haven't heard any.
Regards,
Christoph
3:09 p.m.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 01:58:17 +0100, CW (Christoph) wrote:
> > Long story short: What do you suggest I should tell the
people who
> > complain. They have asked what component they should file bugs against.
> > Are you ok with notification-daemon and polkit-gnome?
>
> Depends on what outcome you expect.
Hi Matthias,
my hope is to fix the problems for our users, this means less complains
and bug reports.
> You can certainly file bugs against
> notification-daemon, but I don't see the autostart file coming back.
This means we would have to file bugs against *all* window and session
managers because ATM we are leaving a lot of people without any support
for policykit or notifications, which is a pretty massive regression
compared to F14.
I've reassigned https://bugzilla.redhat.com/754036 to glib2 (libgio).
Apparently, XFCE does not run notification-daemon and not xfce4-notifyd
either, and that crashes apps in libgio. The crash is not reproducible
with GNOME, and I guess in XFCE will affect (=crash) any app that uses
libnotify.
With my enquiry on xfce list, I've tried to raise awareness of the issue,
not to complain.
5:15 p.m.
Am Mittwoch, den 16.11.2011, 22:09 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
I've reassigned https://bugzilla.redhat.com/754036 to glib2
(libgio).
Apparently, XFCE does not run notification-daemon and not xfce4-notifyd
either,
It does run xfce4-notifyd, it just doesn't install it by default. Maybe
this is something we should change.
and that crashes apps in libgio.
I think that no app should crash when it cannot display a notification.
Regards,
Christoph
6:27 a.m.
Am Montag, den 24.10.2011, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Martin Sourada:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 19:42:48 +0200
Christoph Wickert wrote:
> What launches notification-daemon in F15? dbus? And why is it not
> started in F16 any longer?
>
> The LXDE spin has no notifications and I'm wondering when/why this has
> changed.
>
FYI, now that you mentioned it I discovered in my F15 it does not
auto-start either (XFCE)...
Xfce has xfce4-notifd, which is started correctly, at least on the Xfce
Spin.
Regards,
Christoph
4545
days inactive
4569
days old
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
10 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Christoph Wickert -
Elad Alfassa -
Martin Sourada -
Matthias Clasen -
Michael Schwendt