GConf error

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Fri May 7 16:05:35 UTC 2010

On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 09:38:45AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Pierre-Yves <pingou at pingoured.fr> wrote:
> >
> > Would it be allowed to try to restart gconfd ?
> It would make sense to SIGHUP gconfd after new schemas are installed,
> yes.  Note though we should really only be doing this once at the end
> of a transaction when installation is complete.
My understanding was that with current Fedoras, gconf doesn't need this but
I could be misremembering, missing a corner case, or just wrong :-)

What are the cases that we need to still send a sighup to gconf?  (or is
this a workaround for an undiagnosed bug in the guake gconf schema?)

We can't do this only once at the end of a transaction but if I'm
remembering a different discussion, doing it multiple times at the end
of the rpm transaction should be almost as good (since gconf will wait for
a few moments from getting the first SIGHUP to see if it will get any other
ones.)  Is that correct?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100507/9feb3174/attachment.bin 

More information about the devel mailing list