April 21, 2017 1:22 PM, "David Herrmann" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, David Härdeman <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:19:22PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM, David Härdeman <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm implementing a server which creates an ObjectManager using the >> sd-bus API and there seems to be some differences between how gdbus and >> sd-bus implements the API. >> >> I implemented a simple ObjectManager at /org/gnome/TestManager which >> exports objects /org/gnome/TestManager/fooX with interface >> org.gnome.TestManager.Device. >> >> Under sd-bus, if an object is removed, the following signal is >> generated: >> >> signal time=1492642227.714223 sender=:1.104 -> destination=(null destination) >> serial=90 path=/org/gnome/TestManager; >> interface=org.freedesktop.DBus.ObjectManager; >> member=InterfacesRemoved >> object path "/org/gnome/TestManager/foo0" >> array [ >> string "org.freedesktop.DBus.Peer" >> string "org.freedesktop.DBus.Introspectable" >> string "org.freedesktop.DBus.Properties" >> string "org.freedesktop.DBus.ObjectManager" >> string "org.gnome.TestManager.Device" >> ] >> >> If I implement the same simple server in gdbus, the signal is instead: >> >> signal time=1492642227.714223 sender=:1.104 -> destination=(null destination) >> serial=90 path=/org/gnome/TestManager; >> interface=org.freedesktop.DBus.ObjectManager; >> member=InterfacesRemoved >> object path "/org/gnome/TestManager/foo0" >> array [ >> string "org.gnome.TestManager.Device" >> ] >> >> The corresponding signals are also generated when an object is added. .... >>> 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.
Quite the contrary? If you look at the output from dbus-monitor above, you'll see that it is sd-bus that already *does* report all interfaces while gdbus doesnt? > 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. Maybe, I'm no dbus expert. And there does seem to be a bug in gdbus as well since the additional interfaces manage to confuse it. Anyway, it seems that either sd-bus should adapt the gdbus style or vice versa...maybe you could talk directly to the gdbus people? Regards, David _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
