> On Nov. 25, 2015, 7:39 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > src/kdeinit/kinit.cpp, line 1621 > > <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126161/diff/1/?file=418134#file418134line1621> > > > > Yes if you have to run a separate process which will then dlopen the > > kdeinit module, the whole purpose of kdeinit is moot. You might as well > > simplify your life by getting rid of most of the Q_OS_OSX code in this > > file and simply acting as if the kdeinit module doesn't exist, on Q_OS_OSX. > > > > The existing code to fallback to executing the binary directly will do > > exactly the same as your generic proxy, possibly even faster (no dlopen). > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > You're undoubtedly right, I considered doing this myself. It would amount > to making the `--no-fork` option the default, no? > > I don't feel comfortable/ready for that right now, without having had a > working equivalent to (the patched) kdeinit4 out there in the wild for > observation. Can we leave your suggestion for a 2nd round of housekeeping and > cleanup?
Not at all, --no-fork is about kdeinit's own startup, not about the way it starts other applications. In general I don't see much purpose in pushing complex code if we confirm it to serve no purpose at all. But I looked a bit further into it, and in fact kinit's launch() does fork+dlopen or fork+exec, depending on whether the kdeinit module was found. So if fork + exec is a problem on OSX, then indeed that needs to be addressed But if your patch does fork + exec_helper + dlopen, then that is unnecessarily complex. The simple version of what I have in mind is http://www.davidfaure.fr/2015/kinit.osx.cpp.diff i.e. never using QLibrary on OSX. Would that work? - David ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126161/#review88784 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 24, 2015, 11:03 p.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126161/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 24, 2015, 11:03 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and KDE Frameworks. > > > Repository: kinit > > > Description > ------- > > This patch addresses several issues with the OS X adaptations: > > -1 replaces the obsolete Q_OS_MAC with Q_OS_OSX > -2 builds the relevant applications `nongui` instead of as app bundles > -3 turns klauncher into an "agent" by setting `LSUIElement` to true > programmatically > -4 ports a patch that has been in MacPorts' `port:kdelibs4` since October > 14th 2009, which prevents a kdeinit crash that is caused by calling exec > after `fork()` in an application that has used non-POSIX APIs and/or calling > those APIs in the exec'ed application. This patch (originally by MacPorts > developers Jeremy Lainé and Jeremy Lavergne) rearranges call order and uses a > proxy application to do the actual exec. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/kdeinit/CMakeLists.txt f94db71 > src/kdeinit/kdeinit5_proxy.cpp PRE-CREATION > src/kdeinit/kinit.cpp a18008a > src/klauncher/CMakeLists.txt 746edfa > src/klauncher/klauncher.h e155f72 > src/klauncher/klauncher.cpp 8b3d343 > src/klauncher/klauncher_main.cpp f69aaa5 > src/start_kdeinit/CMakeLists.txt 46d6cb3 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126161/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > On OS X 10.9.5 with Qt 5.5.1 and KF5rameworks 5.16.0 . With this patch, > starting `kded5` will launch kdeinit5 and klauncher5 as expected, but > `kdeinit5 --kded` does not yet launch `kded5`. This is probably acceptable > for typical KF5 use on OS X (kded5 can be launched as a login item or as a > LaunchAgent) but I will have another look at why the kded isn't started. > > I am not yet able to perform further testing; practice will for instance have > to show whether point 2 above needs revision (apps that need to be installed > as app bundles). > > Similarly it will have to be seen whether point 3 above has any drawbacks. > Applications running as agents do not show up in the Dock or App Switcher. > Thus, klauncher will not be able to "turn itself into" an application that > does have a full GUI presence with my current modification. I don't know if > that's supposed to be possible though. > NB: I have been building the KDE4 klauncher in a way that makes it impossible > to construct a GUI at all, so I'm not expecting issues in KF5 as long as > klauncher's role hasn't evolved too much. > > > Thanks, > > René J.V. Bertin > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
