On 01/29/2013 10:26 AM, Mikel Astiz wrote: > Hi David, > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:10 AM, David Henningsson > <david.henningsson at canonical.com> wrote: >> On 01/28/2013 05:59 PM, Mikel Astiz wrote: >>> >>> From: Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz at bmw-carit.de> >>> >>> Extend the reserve-monitor API with a registration mechanism to keep >>> track of existing private connections. This is necessary because the >>> monitor should not consider it busy if a device has been owned by us. >> >> >> Am I missing an earlier thread here, or why do we need this? Isn't the >> existing checks (that I pushed to 3.0 stable) enough to give a correct >> "busy" result? > > The "busy" result is working fine except if private D-Bus connections > are used, as introduced in patch v0 2/2. > > In this case the unique name of the bus differs compared to the bus > used by the monitor, but we still want to consider it as non-busy. > > I'll make this more clear in the header-file comment in v1, as > suggested by Tanu. > > Cheers, > Mikel > Sorry if I'm responding slower than you write patches :-) But wouldn't it be simpler/cleaner just to instantiate the monitor with the name(s) that shouldn't count as busy? Like this: int rm_watch( rm_monitor **m, DBusConnection *connection, const char *device_name, rm_change_cb_t change_cb, + const char *dbus_unique_name, /* if the device is owned by this dbus name, don't consider it busy */ DBusError *error); -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
