On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 19:51 -0800, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > I see you throw up that link on many discussions > related to gconf but is someone working on that or > plans to? Not that I know of. That's why I keep posting the link ;-) Someday someone will read it and say "oh, I should do that" > I have also heard discussions about a fd.o system to > replace this one > (newconf?). has there been any progress in that front ? D-BUS is moving along nicely, which would give you the basic building block. The "future gconf" described at the link I posted *should* be a fair bit easier to implement than current gconf is, and less code in the end. Havoc
