On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Mark Shuttleworth <m...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Interfaces should actually handle this case very well, as long as both > sides of the file exchange are predictable. So I can imagine CUPS > providing an interface to ingest PPDs and a PPD snap that consumes that > interface making the PPDs available. > > In the next wave of landings, you'll see the ability to execute code in > both snaps when an interface is being connected, allowing you to agree > for example on filenames etc. > Ack: In any pure snap setup the interface based solution would have been my way to go for this. And it certainly is the right one. In the context of the request I was thinking more about snaps on classic and how e.g. a "classic" system could pick up those. Or turning around the statement: How a snap would ensure things are picked up by the "host" in classic. A generic solution for this isn't the most important feature - as it might also break isolation more than we like. So - if considered as a generic feature - this might just end up as one of the constraints for snaps on classic. But for a few common cases (like manpages see bug 1575593 I think we should design and provide something that can be commonly used). Looking forward for the next wave of landings then - maybe the "active interface connect" if we want to call it that way would already provide enough to solve it that way.
-- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
