Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 20:20 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > This is the canonical place, as far as I know: > . Perfect, thanks! Federico ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On 07.10.2010 18:14, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: Is the list of annotations documented anywhere? This is the canonical place, as far as I know: . ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-lis

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 09:59 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > Then I would play down the security benefits of the features in the > documentation... Yeah, good point. The docs as they are just say that you can't go outside the roots, which could mean that the code tries really hard to do that.

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 00:28 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > > G_TYPE_STRV properties don't need annotations, they are handled > automatically. But functions like your > gtk_file_chooser_set_root_uris > need to have annotations to tell gobject-introspection that 'char > **roots' is actually

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 07:09 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > When "rooted to $HOME and /tmp", I > found that typing '/' would still complete all toplevel directories, > while typing '/t' comes up with no completions. I would have expected > just '/tmp' in both cases. Good catch, thanks. I'll take

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > Hi, all, > > I've been running Christian Hammond's multiroot-filechooser branch for > about a month now, with zero ill effects.  This is not surprising, as no > apps actually use the multirooting functionality yet; what is nice is > t

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:24 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:01 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > Symbolic links? To both the filesystem itself, and to directories under > > ~/.gvfs/. Are those blocked as expected? > > Looks like we have different expectations ;)

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On 06.10.2010 23:48, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:32 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: Yes, I think so. It's pretty common for arguments and properties, so most bindings will be able to deal with it. With proper annotations, gobject-introspection can also represent it

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:32 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > Yes, I think so. It's pretty common for arguments and properties, so > most bindings will be able to deal with it. With proper annotations, > gobject-introspection can also represent it. Excellent. Where are those annotations mad

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:01 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > Symbolic links? To both the filesystem itself, and to directories under > ~/.gvfs/. Are those blocked as expected? Looks like we have different expectations ;) Nope, we don't try to resolve symlinks to see if they point to allowed hierar

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On 06.10.2010 21:06, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: Is a boxed G_TYPE_STRV friendly enough to language bindings? Yes, I think so. It's pretty common for arguments and properties, so most bindings will be able to deal with it. With proper annotations, gobject-introspection can also represent

Re: multiroot-filechooser ready for merging

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 14:06 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > Hi, all, > > I've been running Christian Hammond's multiroot-filechooser branch for > about a month now, with zero ill effects. This is not surprising, as no > apps actually use the multirooting functionality yet; what is nice is