Le mer, 28/04/2004 à 08:55 +0200, Miguel Rodríguez a écrit : > On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 07:33 +0200, PUYDT Julien wrote: > > Bonobo doesn't run on win32 as far as we know, and isn't kde-friendly, > > so that means if we go for bonobo, we'll have to add yet another > > implementation of that too. > > > What do you mean but "not-kde friendly". Is there a real reason why it > should not be used under kde (of the kind of makes kde unusable, or the > *user* notices because of a, b and c?) Bonobo is not usable from KDE apps. DBUS will be. > > > Ugh. More custom protocols for doing IPC is something we don't need > > > really. What is keeping you from using ORBit/Bonobo for this? It is > > > portable. As portable as using other unix sockets is anyway, since that > > > is all that ORBit does for the IPC communication. It just happens to > > > already be a full-fledged standard that is widely used for doing things. > > > The GNOME build is going to depend on bonobo anyway. > > > > Quite true, but at least it will work for gnome+kde+win32... > > Again, AFAIK ORBit/Bonobo works great under KDE. In fact it does under > fvwm... Ah, what KDE program is able to interact with a GNOME program through bonobo? > Don't know about win32, but i would guess the non-ui part of bonobo > should be easily portable. > Ah, even better. Do you volunteer?
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=