Thiago was against introducing a QStorageInfoPlugin. However, i thinkg we can try to dopen a udisks library. But why not simply try to link to it on Linux? Are there any linux versions that doesn't have udisks now?
Иван Комиссаров 29 авг. 2014 г., в 17:57, Rutledge Shawn <[email protected]> написал(а): On 29 Aug 2014, at 1:01 PM, Иван Комиссаров wrote: >> 29 авг. 2014 г., в 14:46, André Somers <[email protected]> написал(а): >> Thiago Macieira schreef op 29-8-2014 06:32: >>>> Could be, but I want to be really clear that it should only be local, >>>> remote and unknown. I don't want other types like "removable >>>> magnetic", "removable optical", "removable solid state", "virtual >>>> regular filesystem", "virtual special", etc. >>> Just wondering, but what exactly is the problem with providing more >>> details if such details are available? A combination of flags "local", >>> "removable" and "optical" would be quite informative. >>> >>> André >> >> The problem is you can't rely on that information. For example, "optical" is >> totally useless on Linux (we can't get that info). > > The kernel knows, and so does udevd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udev) (it > has to know in order to create the device node, /dev/sr0 on my system). But > talking to it involves dbus (and we already discussed the "problem" that it's > a dependency). My last suggestion was that maybe we can dynamically load > /usr/lib/libudisks2.so or /usr/lib/libudev.so.1, either of which has plain C > API, right? (Use the dlopen / QLibrary technique, and try not to use APIs > that are too new or likely to change later, if there are any such.) Or we > can use qdbus via a plugin, or by whatever means such that not having qdbus > or not having udevd is not fatal. If any of that fails, it merely means we > don't know the type of the disk, and that's what we have the zero flag for. > It should work most of the time. But I think udisks only takes care of local > volumes, so if there is a drive that udisks doesn't know about, it could be > taken as a clue that it might be a network drive. But the current code > already shows the protocol as the filesystem if it's a remote drive. > > http://udisks.freedesktop.org/docs/latest/gdbus-org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Drive.html#gdbus-property-org-freedesktop-UDisks2-Drive.MediaCompatibility > > What about btrfs subvolumes, does udisks know about those too? _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
