RSS/Atom feed Twitter
Site is read-only, email is disabled

gimp and dbus

This discussion is connected to the gimp-developer-list.gnome.org mailing list which is provided by the GIMP developers and not related to gimpusers.com.

This is a read-only list on gimpusers.com so this discussion thread is read-only, too.

4 of 4 messages available
Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.

gimp and dbus Yves de Champlain 27 Sep 01:25
  gimp and dbus Sven Neumann 27 Sep 08:59
   gimp and dbus Yves de Champlain 27 Sep 18:10
    gimp and dbus Sven Neumann 27 Sep 21:21
Yves de Champlain
2007-09-27 01:25:40 UTC (about 17 years ago)

gimp and dbus

Hi

Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question ...

Is it possible to compile gimp with dbus support without having to use dbus-lauch to launch it ?

thanks

yves

Sven Neumann
2007-09-27 08:59:57 UTC (about 17 years ago)

gimp and dbus

Hi,

On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 19:25 -0400, Yves de Champlain wrote:

Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question ...

Is it possible to compile gimp with dbus support without having to use dbus-lauch to launch it ?

d-bus support only makes sense if you are on a desktop that already runs a session bus. The GNOME desktop environment for example provides this. So if that is not the case for you, then you should probably compile without d-bus support.

We might not have tested this good enough. Are there any problems running an executable that is compiled with d-bus support on a desktop without a session bus?

Sven

Yves de Champlain
2007-09-27 18:10:43 UTC (about 17 years ago)

gimp and dbus

Le 07-09-27 à 02:59, Sven Neumann a écrit :

Hi,

On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 19:25 -0400, Yves de Champlain wrote:

Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question ...

Is it possible to compile gimp with dbus support without having to use dbus-lauch to launch it ?

d-bus support only makes sense if you are on a desktop that already runs
a session bus. The GNOME desktop environment for example provides this.
So if that is not the case for you, then you should probably compile without d-bus support.

We might not have tested this good enough. Are there any problems running an executable that is compiled with d-bus support on a desktop without a session bus?

My problem is, in fact, thatI don't really know dbus and how it works, but I maintain gimp for macports and I usually try to go with the app's default settings.

Now, if I get it right, it should work if, for example, I am running gimp inside a dbus-launched gnome-session ?

I do have a dbus-daemon running but it does not seem sufficient. I get

yves$ gimp-2.4 process 16616: D-Bus library appears to be incorrectly set up; failed to read machine uuid: Failed to open "/opt/local/var/lib/dbus/machine- id": No such file or directory

So I replaced the gimp symlink with a little script that just does "dbus-launch gimp-2.4" but I am considering to make dbus an option rather than a default in macports.

Do you have an opinion about this ?

Thanks

yves

Sven Neumann
2007-09-27 21:21:07 UTC (about 17 years ago)

gimp and dbus

Hi,

On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 12:10 -0400, Yves de Champlain wrote:

My problem is, in fact, thatI don't really know dbus and how it works, but I maintain gimp for macports and I usually try to go with the app's default settings.

I suggest that you explicitely disable d-bus support then. There's a configure option for this.

Sven