Re: GMC 4.5.7 coredumps =O(

>From: Miguel de Icaza <>
>Thanks a lot for the stack trace and the precise bug report.

Hey, I want to get it working here - it's not like I'm just doing *you* favours 

>Can you please try the patch included at the end.

Yup, works a treat - gmc is now up and working for me.

>> Is it really necessary to open and cache directories below like this anyway?  
>The reason this is required is because the tree needs to know which of
>those directories have childs (and thus, can mark those directories
>with an open symbol [+]).

But while I walk around the tree structures below my home directory, I 
*regularly* click on a directory, and have a [+] added to it then, as it 
discovers directories below it.  This is just fine, as far as I'm concerned.

>> I ask simply coz this takes many minutes here, and I'd have to wait
>> for it each time I open gmc...  Could it be thrown over to a
>> separate thread, maybe?
>I will add an option to toggle the tree code off.
>I have plans on doing the tree computation on the idle loop, but it
>might take a while before I do it (mostly because I have a huge list
>of other things to fix).

As a thought, why not quickly count the number of directories you have to check, 
and if it's more than say 20, then just list them, and if you have time in the 
idle thread, update the [+]'s where necessary.  If <20, then go do it now.  
You're right that you can't guess which directories I might want to search 
later, not a clever suggestion on my part.  But you *can* guess how usable a 
tool that takes forever to start is, compared to a tool that doesn't always put 
a [+] in the right place... ;O)

Right now I have to wait *5 minutes* (no exageration, I timed it), on a 300Mhz 
UltraSPARC on a 100Mbps link to the home server, for GMC to finish searching 
/home/* and actually paint the window and become usable.  I then got another 
long pause when I entered a directory with a large subtree structure.

The GUI and the tree search in the same thread seems like a *big* limitation to 
me, but I know it's not easy to change this now, and most users wont see the 
problem.  As a workaround, making some choises about whether doing the tree 
search is worth the outcome, when the tree is above a certain size, might be 

Again, I know this effects few people, and I'm just being selfish.  Thanks again 
for the effort you've put in to date helping me get this going,

-------My opinion - Not sane, intelligent or necessarily useful-------
o o                             
/v\ark R. Bowyer.  mailto:Mark.Bowyer@UK.Sun.COM
`-'                                             I'm the dots in

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]