Re: Corba-izing gnome-pilot

[Manish Vachharajani <mvachhar vger rutgers edu>]

On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 jrb@redhat.com wrote:

> We do actually have a problem here, that needs dealing with.
> Unfortunately, we are forking with each sync.  That's Ok for most
> things, but will confuse the heck out of ORBIT.  We need to actually
> do a CORBA_ORB_shutdown of the old ORB, (and hope that it works) and
> create a new one.  This is really a pain, given the way we are
> currently initializing ORBit.  This segue nicely into my second
> point:

But wait, doesn't a CORBA_ORB_shutdown close down the connection to the
ORB?  Will the ORB know that there are two processes now, I doubt it.
 
> I would like to change our ORB handling to use gnome_CORBA_init, b/c
> we need to do that in order to use the name server.  The problem with
> this (and the reason, as I understand it) is that it'll require us to
> link to every library under the sun.  In the future, libgnorba won't
> (shouldn't!!!!) have these dependencies, as the main-loop stuff is
> being moved to glib.  For now, my version of gpilotd uses this, and it
> will be the Right-Thing-To-Do (TM).  Would anyone mind if I checked it
> in on Monday?

Hmm, seems ok to me for now, provided that the move to glib happens
soon(In the next 3-4 weeks).  If, by some miracle, we can put together a
release before 1999, I don't want users to have to run gpilotd with an
apporpriate $DISPLAY variable set and Xserver running, nor do I want to
have to link to gtk+.  I believe gnome_CORBA_init calls gtk_init which
does some X stuff correct? Do you have any idea on the time table of the
move of the gnorba loop stuff to glib?  Also, how will moving to
gnome_CORBA_init solve our fork problem, maybe I am being dense but I
think the forking will cause the same problems.  What about just having
the conduit make a new connection to the ORB?

> > Also, does anyone know how to remove the CORBA stuff from the ~/.gnome dir
> > if I control-C gpilotd so I can run it again without hand editing the IOR
> > stuff?
> 
> We should prolly just add some signal handlers to clean up after
> ourselves... I don't think too much else is required.  This is
> actually something I'd like to do with gnorba anyway, to avoid setting
> a lock file.

Ok, then we can do this stuff in gnorba and just use gnome_CORBA_init, but
see my concern above.

> -Jonathan
> 

Manish Vachharajani               Some Haiku: A crash reduces
<mvachhar@vger.rutgers.edu>                   your expensive computer
                                              to a simple stone - Unknown