On 5/9/21 2:28 AM, David Faure wrote:
On dimanche 9 mai 2021 07:49:40 CEST Thayne wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 2:51 AM Thomas Kluyver <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 7 May 2021, at 07:14, Thayne McCombs wrote:
2. For terminals that don't natively support DBus (xterm, alacritty, st,
urxvt, etc.) would you then need a seperate desktop file for a wrapper
that launched it with dbus (ideally I'd like to see a generic wrapper
that could work with most/all terminals by passing in options when
starting it).
I assume you would need wrappers, yes. You could write one wrapper for
many terminal emulators, but if you have more than one installed, you
recreate the same problem: how does the wrapper decide which one you want?
The neater solution with the proposed intent-apps spec would be for each
terminal emulator to have its own D-Bus wrapper, so you can use
intent-apps
to choose between them. If it gets traction, I imagine that distros would
ship these wrappers in their packages for different terminal emulators.
You would need seperate desktop files for sure, but I think it would be
possible, and reasonable to have a single D-Bus wrapper executable that is
flexible enough to be used for most terminals, just called with different
arguments. So for example the desktop file for alacritty would use
something like `xdg-dbus-terminal-launcher alacritty --command-option=-e
--working-dir-option=--working-directory --keep-open-option=--hold`. Note
that the working directory and environment can be set by the wrapper before
forking.
This is a great idea. Do I hear a volunteer for implementing this with as few
dependencies as possible? ;-)
Sure, I can do that.
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
