Re: Eog & gnome-vfs dependency

[Jens Finke <jens eknif de>]

On Wed, 30 May 2001, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> > the file handling of eog is really a mess. This is mainly because of the
> > lack of consequent URI based file handling.  Currently we have a mix of
> > old fashioned local path descriptions and simple monikers (which are in
> > fact URIs like 'file:/home/jens/foo.png') for resolving bonobo objects.
> > To use the BonoboStream/Storage mechanism as a filesystem abstraction
> > wasn't a good idea, 'cos it lacks of some important functionality and is
> > broken in some ways (it just was not designed for it).
> >
> > I think we could (and should) change the situation if we would use
> > gnome-vfs for all the file handling stuff within eog. Are there any
> > objections against this additional dependency? Since gnome-vfs is part of
> > the stable development plattform I see no reason for not depending on it.
> > What do you think?
>
> No problem at all.  Perhaps EOG itself should load images just with
> gnome-vfs, but still provide a means for hydrating an image viewer
> control or embeddable via a BonoboStream.

Yes, this was my idea. We should use gnome-vfs in the first place, because
it has more useful functions for abstract filesystem handling. I will work
on this in the next days.

> [If you are really bored over the weekend or something, it would be a
> good idea to rename eog-shell into eog and just punt the old eog
> program.]

Ok, consider this as finished ;-).

Regrads,

   Jens