[systemd-devel] sd-bus: ObjectManager difference with gdbus

[David Härdeman]

April 24, 2017 5:49 PM, "Dan Williams" <dcbw at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 16:50 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> On Fri, 21.04.17 13:22, David Herrmann (dh.herrmann at gmail.com) wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Anyway, gdbus bugs aside, it seems that the interfaces
>>>>> reported by
>>>>> sd-bus should match what gdbus does? (assuming, of course,
>>>>> that gdbus
>>>>> can be considered the "reference" implementation).
>>>> 
>>>> Does the appended patch fix your issue?
>>>> (line-breaks might be screwed, sorry)
>>> 
>>> Haven't tried it yet, but just from reading the patch...it seems
>>> to do
>>> the opposite of what I'd expect? I.e. add *more* interfaces?
>> 
>> This change makes sure all objects have the built-in interfaces
>> reported at all times. The GetManagedObjects() call didn't report
>> them
>> so far.
>> 
>> Note that we really better report all interfaces an object
>> supports. I
>> don't know why glib does not do this, but I think it should.
>> 
>> Yeah, I#d agree with that. I think we should provide complete
>> information, and that means including built-in interfaces in all our
>> messages, in particular as some of them are optional. It appears to
>> me, that gdbus should be changed here, not sd-bus...
> 
> It's not clear that the GNOME side was implemented correctly yet.
> Would be nice to see the sample code.
> 
> Dan

My GNOME-based client was based on the gdbus-example-objectmanager-client.c so I hope it's correct, but sure, I'll try to pare down the GNOME/gdbus-based client code and the (sd-bus based) server code to two simple test cases and provide those later this week.

Regards,
David