LinuxRegistry in Freedesktop & KDE
Duncan Mac-Vicar Prett
duncan at kde.org
Sat Apr 17 09:29:11 EEST 2004
El Friday 16 April 2004 17:45, George escribió:
> Are you trying to just find ways to semi-unbreak some system you fell in
> love with for whatever reason (it can't be a reasonable reason given the
No, I just used the freedom of speech of the internet to propose an idea,
explain the reasons why I found it cool, and try to find arguments against it
from other people and then improve my vision from what I learned hearing
> 'system' in question)? It solves no issues, just breaks existing config
> files, replaces them with different ones which have a different set of
can you explain us why does it breaks something?
> I could very well push ve-config for the same purpose. I can then write a
> tool to view trees of such .ini style files that ve-config uses as a GUI
> and then name it something like ViciousRegistry. And I bet it would
> actually perform better on most systems and would have less issues.
Don't know what ve-config is. But I am not pushing LR for an specific purpose,
I just find it cool to have a common ay to store config, and I haven't found
another solution (simple, no-dependencies, plain text files). So I am pushing
it just to hear opinions and make a discussion about it. Why? I dont want to
see someday FD.org proclamating GConf as a FD cfg standard and telling myself
"why didn't I participate in the discussion?"
> One smaller issue is that ve-config files are easily human editable and
> preserve comments and all kinds of fun stuff to allow mixed gui/text editor
Linux registry are plain files too, thats why I added a comment "read the
website first", because you came here with the same prejudice about
registries I had before reading about it. But don't worry, I was sure more
than one person would not resist the impulse to flame and reply without
breathing and reading first. LR handle comments too.
> style configuration editting. But will I push this as a replacement for
> GConf? No. Why? Because my crack just isn't that good (I ought to get a
> better dealer). For example for gdm, Linux Registry has all the problems of
> GConf without any of the benefits, and thus I will never likely use it.
> To note why the author of Linux Registry is on some very heavy crack, one
> just has to balance the goal of trying to make an API/config system
> standard for free software application (and thus hardly just linux) and the
He is not on crack, he just wrote free software.
> "Actually, the (inevitable) adoption of Reiser4 filesystem will eliminate
> this issue."
> So this is a system which will semi-work ok on some linux systems which
> happen to use the proper file system and you are thinking it will get
> adopted as a standard for apps like apache (or just about any other free
> software server or desktop app) which runs on many systems that don't even
> support said filesystem.
You are talking about performance problems without measuring them first. The
author is assuming it performs bad, but perhaps it doesn't. You talk about
other solutions being better because they are human editable, but you didn't
even noticed LR is human readable too.
Christian, Sean and Waldo gave very nice comments (not all in favour of LR)
but they spent the time reading about it, showed possible better alternatives
(like CFG) , offered assistance about testing it in KDE environments, exposed
the lacks of LR. without saying the author of LR is on crack. or that I am a
freak trying to push a tecnology I felt in love without reason, not
surprised, because I am very used to the high level of discussions in the KDE
community. KeithP was also very nice on irc when I talk about it.
More information about the xdg