Ah, I see... if I were do #3, would I simply just call all of theOn Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Jussi Kukkonen
<jussi kukkonen intel com> wrote:
> On 21 January 2016 at 22:23, Nick Deubert <ndeubert gmail com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Everyone,
>>
>> I've been lingering on irc, but figured I would post here to get a
>> broader audience. I am working on implementing a media renderer using
>> GUPNP. I started by looking at the example code and followed the
>> "Writing a UPnP Service" tutorial. I used the AVTransport3.xml
>> RenderingControl3.xml and ConnectionManager3.xml files from upnp.org
>> for my SCPDs and ran them through gupnp-binding-tool to create the
>> action_get/set and signal_connect functions, though I don't see these
>> equivalent functions in the example code so I wasn't sure if this was
>> necessary?
>
> In a couple of places GUPnP has multiple ways to do something -- this is one
> of them and the docs don't really make it clear how you're supposed to pick
> one. The main options are:
> 1. Write all the signal connection stuff by hand, e.g.:
> g_signal_connect (service, "action-invoked::GetProtocolInfo", cb, data);
> 2. Use gupnp_service_signals_autoconnect() and hope you got every function
> name correct
> 3. Use the gupnp-binding-tool to generate a service-specific API and use
> e.g.
> cm_get_protocol_info_action_connect (service, cb, data)
>
> All have pros and cons but TL;DR is that if you use #2, there's no need for
> the gupnp-binding-tool generated files of #3.
_action_set and _action_connect functions on startup in place of the
autoconnect call?