Re: [Nautilus-list] nautilus on freebsd - questions on nautilus_application_startup

[Darin Adler <darin bentspoon com>]

On Thursday, July 12, 2001, at 08:41  AM, Klaus Herrmann wrote:

> i continued my debugging and got a liitle further. nautilus calls
> Nautilus_Shell_open_default_window(), but never returns from it. as
> this code is really really ugly autogenerated code, i really don't know
> what to do next about it. any ideas?

The ugly autogenerated code is a CORBA stub. This is how CORBA calls work.
 It should be pretty easy to step through this ugly code (hold your nose 
while you're doing it) and see where it goes. While the code may be ugly, 
it's not impossible to decipher. In the end, if it's working properly, the 
code will end up calling through to a function inside the same process. If 
you instead find it sending data out a socket or something like that, then 
you are seeing some kind of ORBit bug, because this should be a call 
within the process.

[By the way, the autogenerated code could be made easier to read. But that'
s a matter for the maintainers of ORBit. I think they are looking for 
efficiency and are not concerned with how the code looks, but I'd love a 
debug mode where the code was simpler and easier to read even if a bit 
slower.]

> by the way, if i avoid the Nautilus_Shell_open_default_window() call,
> nautilus complains that it has no viewer capable to display
> .gnome-desktop - i hope this is a consequence of disabling the default
> window and not our next problem... :-/

I expect this indicates a problem with the result of an OAF query, and I 
presume it will be the next problem. I doubt it has anything to do with 
the default window issue.

Have you done any tests of Bonobo and OAF alone? I ask because it's pretty 
hard to debug ORBit, Bonobo, and OAF using Nautilus as the test bed. If 
these packages are already known to work, it can save you a lot of time 
and headaches; it's a lot easier to debug Bonobo and OAF test programs 
than Nautilus as a whole.

    -- Darin