Proposing ObjectManager interface

Will Thompson will.thompson at
Tue Mar 1 05:59:28 PST 2011

On 01/03/11 12:55, David Zeuthen wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Simon McVittie
> <simon.mcvittie at> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 at 17:20:45 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
>>>  type='signal',sender=':1.42',pathGlob='/org/app/subtree*'
>> That's arg0path='/org/app/subtree/', which also matches signals emitted
>> from /org and /org/app (I don't know why Ryan made it do that - perhaps to
>> make it symmetric, so it can be an equivalence relation? - but it doesn't seem
>> likely to be a practical problem).
> Hmm, that's what I originally thought too when I designed the
> ObjectManager stuff but I think it's wrong. I mean, the intention is
> to match any message that concerns a path (not argument) that matches
> the glob /org/app/subtree* - this doesn't have anything to do with
> arg0path since the message may not even have any arguments. Right?

I think my branch on
makes it possible to do this subtree matching on the path header of the
message (though I could be wrong, it's been a while).

The branch also documents why Ryan made it work how it does. The short
answer is “dconf”.

It doesn't match on any object paths anywhere in the message: do we
really want to go down that road? What if a message contains paths
inside variants inside dicts, should we match those? (I could be
misunderstanding your mail.)



More information about the dbus mailing list