Re: Re: GConf - only for preferences... why?

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 05:44:11PM +0930, tysonlt office webmedia com au wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> > You're going to have a very tough time convincing any of the major
> > daemon maintainers to use a config lib though.
>
> Could you please elaborate? I am just beginning in GTK programming (and C
> for that matter - I'm a Java man by trade) and am looking to get started
> on the right foot, the way all the grumpy C programmers would do things :)
>
> My guess is that the best thing to do is to write your own little config
> library, and save your values out to INI or XML files. That way you are
> reducing points of failure - a filesystem is more likely to be available
> than a network daemon, right?

All I'm saying is that e.g. the maintainers of Apache or Samba or
whatever aren't likely to be interested in moving to something like
gconf, as they need to keep back compat for their config files and
probably don't want external dependencies.

What I would say is that best-practice if you're designing a system
daemon these days is to use XML for the config file. But discussing
this is a fair bit off-topic for this mailing list.

Havoc