#1147 closed defect (fixed)
Sugar needs to accept None as a layout
| Reported by: | bemasc | Owned by: | tomeu |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | High | Milestone: | |
| Component: | Sugar | Version: | 0.84.x |
| Severity: | Critical | Keywords: | r+ |
| Cc: | sascha_silbe, alsroot | Distribution/OS: | Unspecified |
| Bug Status: | Unconfirmed |
Description
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg-server/+bug/325706, comments 16 and 17.
Sugar should not fail to launch if gconf keys are missing. One-line fix is needed at
http://git.sugarlabs.org/projects/sugar/repos/mainline/blobs/HEAD/src/jarabe/desktop/favoritesview.py#line284
The fix could be as simple as logging a warning and choosing the Ring View if the requested layout is unknown.
This should also cause a bugfix release for 0.84. I have experienced this bug myself in Gentoo.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by sascha_silbe
- Cc sascha_silbe added
comment:2 follow-up: ↓ 3 Changed 14 years ago by tomeu
comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 2 ; follow-up: ↓ 4 Changed 14 years ago by bemasc
- Cc alsroot added
Replying to tomeu:
I have no problem with the suggested change itself, but if packagers aren't properly installing the schema files, important functionality in Sugar will stop working, unless we recode a gconf replacement.
Though we can say that gconf values are user input, and Sugar should indeed be as tolerant as possible there.
I agree with this. Sugar should always work, no matter what the user does to $HOME. If the contents of .gconf or .sugar are bizarre and invalid, Sugar should respond intelligently, not just die.
About making a bugfix releases, this will depend on the interest that packagers will show.
I think I can convince alsroot to make a new release for Gentoo, at least, since that is where I experienced this bug.
A patch would be very appreciated, see http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review
Attached a patch to show what I'm thinking about, though I haven't tested it.
comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 14 years ago by alsroot
Replying to bemasc:
Replying to tomeu:
I have no problem with the suggested change itself, but if packagers aren't properly installing the schema files, important functionality in Sugar will stop working, unless we recode a gconf replacement.
Though we can say that gconf values are user input, and Sugar should indeed be as tolerant as possible there.
I agree with this. Sugar should always work, no matter what the user does to $HOME. If the contents of .gconf or .sugar are bizarre and invalid, Sugar should respond intelligently, not just die.
at first, it was gentoo-overlay bug when gconf schema wasn't installed, now its fixed(and after updating sugar user will get proper gconf values)
About making a bugfix releases, this will depend on the interest that packagers will show.
I think I can convince alsroot to make a new release for Gentoo, at least, since that is where I experienced this bug.
A patch would be very appreciated, see http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review
Attached a patch to show what I'm thinking about, though I haven't tested it.
comment:5 Changed 14 years ago by tomeu
- Keywords r? added
- Milestone changed from Unspecified by Release Team to 0.86
- Priority changed from Unspecified by Maintainer to High
- Severity changed from Unspecified to Critical
Setting the r? keyword so it appears in the review queue.
comment:6 Changed 14 years ago by tomeu
- Keywords r+ added; r? removed
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
I have no problem with the suggested change itself, but if packagers aren't properly installing the schema files, important functionality in Sugar will stop working, unless we recode a gconf replacement.
Though we can say that gconf values are user input, and Sugar should indeed be as tolerant as possible there.
About making a bugfix releases, this will depend on the interest that packagers will show.
A patch would be very appreciated, see http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review