Re: location management vs. session management

[Glynn Foster <glynn foster sun com>]

Havoc Pennington wrote:
> 
> Glynn Foster <glynn foster sun com> writes:
> > Yes, the way it works is probably wrong in that we really should be
> > sticking to some spec and using ID's, but I think the idea of named
> > sessions is much more user friendly, if a little hacky.
> 
> You're using the session name as session ID? I don't think that will
> work. ;-) IIRC the session ID has to be in Latin-1, the name has to be
> in UTF-8 (for gnome 2, in locale encoding in gnome current), if
> nothing else. Just keep a file mapping from name to ID, right?

Yeah, I think I was doing something very dumb for the panel config. 
Something very, very dumb. :)

> > AFAIK, the location management stuff is only in Ximian Setup Tools...but
> > I could be wrong about this? My idea is that the location management
> > stuff should really only save X/network etc.. configuration and let
> > gnome-session [multi-session] worry about the desktop.
> 
> What's an example of an X/network setting? That doesn't sound like
> what location management does currently, I could be wrong though.

Well, this is all speculation [because I haven't looked at the code] but 
I thought I remember hearing plans from Chema that it would save and load things 
like whether you are using a static IP or DHCP, a different DNS, a different
printer config, a different monitor [hence a different resolution]. But having
a look at the screenshot, it looks a little different -
	http://www.gnome.org/~chema/location_management.png
I should really look at the code, or maybe Chema can explain?


		See ya,
			Glynn ;)