Signature length

Havoc Pennington hp at
Mon May 21 23:30:31 PDT 2007


Sean Kang wrote:
> I'm currently using GConf-DBus and it seems(not verified, but it might 
> be) there is a problem with the limitation given by D-Bus.
> Would it be there, if modified, any immediate problem if that limitation 
> is removed or raised?  (how to raise that variable would be welcome :-) )

First step is to figure out exactly why gconf-dbus is doing this.

It's almost certainly a design problem with gconf-dbus. I think the 
gconf-dbus patch is so old, it may predate dbus recursive array types. 
Thus, it may have had to use methods with tons of args instead of an 
array. gconf-dbus could then just be fixed to use an array.

If there's some legitimate, sane method signature that breaks the 
signature length limit we can talk about the pain involved with 
increasing that limit, but it's tough for me to imagine.


More information about the dbus mailing list