thiago.macieira at trolltech.com
Wed Jun 7 11:48:50 PDT 2006
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>Actually I think if you set an explicit destination on the signal it
> will do the right thing - ie unicast to that recipient only.
But the signal may multicast to many different objects and listeners
inside that recipient, so I would imagine this is a dangerous feature.
Imagine that we decide to merge two services in one daemon later. They
could share the same D-BUS connection, so they'd still receive the signal
>The only problems I remember having with setting an explicit
> destinations are:
> * In the context of method calls - you can set a destination to be a
> well known bus name (org.example.blah), but it wouldn't let me set a
> destination based on unique name (:1.2).
This sounds like a bug, but right now all of the calls I place are done
with a unique name. So I something may be wrong in your code.
> * Signal match rules - you can register a match rule based on a unique
> bus name (:1.2), but not one based ona well known bus name
True, this is an important feature. If you want to receive a signal from a
specific bus name, you need to listen for the NameOwnerChanged signal and
update the unique connection your match rule points to.
Thiago José Macieira - thiago.macieira AT trolltech.com
Trolltech AS - Sandakerveien 116, NO-0402 Oslo, Norway
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dbus/attachments/20060607/c0c965e1/attachment.pgp
More information about the dbus