Re: a suggestion about error-messages

Oh sorry, I think you misunderstood me a bit: The dialog should only appear
when a program exits, and only if the program was started from the gnome
panel or from a menu. A terminal should work exactly as it usually does.

But you are right, the important question is really if each program should
provide an error message in case of a crash, or the system should trap it.
It just bugs me that no program that I know of do that, so I think it would
be nice if the system trapped it. This solution would also work for
non-gnome programs.

Peter Soendergaard

Hassan Aurag wrote:

>  I don't fully agree.
>  You use a gnome-terminal and you type something wrong, it pops-up a
> message. This could become annoying.
>  However, I agree that coders should catch their errors and pop an
> error message if necessary, that is when stderr is not in their app in
> other wors when it is not a terminal-like app. Also it really is easy,
> Gnome already has easiest to sue utility for such a thing.
>  It's really up to the coders to do that!
> My 2 cents
> H. Aurag
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> On 11/24/99, 10:06:59 AM, Peter Søndergaard <>
> wrote regarding a suggestion about error-messages:
> > Hi!
> > I all of the GUIs I have used for Linux/Unix, one thing has bothered
> me:
> > When a program crashes I dont get an error message: The error message
> is
> > sent to stdout/stderr, but I cant see that if the program has been
> > launched from a panel / menu. If f.x. I make a launcher in the
> > Gnome-panel which tries to execute the command "sklhgsd" (which
> > obviously doesnt exists) I can just push the button forever whithout
> > ever being informed that the command doesnt exist.
> > A solution to this could be simply to trap stdout and stderr from any
> > comand launched from the panel / a menu, and then pop up a small
> dialog
> > offering you to see stdout or stderr whenever a program exites whith
> an
> > errorlevel different from 0.
> > For the novice user this might not be very informative, but at least
> you
> > will know that something happened, and it will almost always be
> > something more informative than "Unknown error 7091" :-). The
> > experienced user on the other hand could be told quite a lot from this
> > information.
> > In all cases you would get the feeling that you are more in  control,
> > that things does not just happen without you knowing it. I would give
> > you a feeling that the GUI was more integrated with the rest of the
> > system, not just some fancy program-launcher sitting on top, hiding
> > important information from you.
> > This model could maybe be expanded a bit, so that you from another
> > program could examine stdout/stderror from running programs.  This
> could
> > really kill of the necessity of the terminal.
> > Anyway, I think more error messages would give a more 'integrated'
> > feeling.
> > Pardon if this subject has already been discussed, you are then free
> to
> > flame me! I am new to the list.
> > Peter Soendergaard
> > --
> > To unsubscribe: mail with
> "unsubscribe"
> > as the Subject.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]