So, i played around a bit with SailJail some months ago, and never quite figured it out.
One of the side-effects what that SeaPrint is now setting OrganizationName according to this.
I left it in, admittedly not thinking too much about it, but if anything it felt like a reasonable preparation.
That then passed Harbour QA 3 times, but now it was rejected. What gives?
Is setting proper OrganizationNames not something we want in the future?
Changing back only to have to set it again in a couple of months seems not so nice.
But any clear recommendation on this would be much appreciated.
Like mentioned in the email you received, your app writes to a directory which is not allowed. Sure, it happens because you followed the instructions in the sailjail repository. But the Sailjail stuff is not yet ready to be used by third party applications.
Might be so. Or not. I don’t know, and quite likely nobody does. That’s exactly why this stuff is not yet allowed in Harbour.
But anyway, thanks for testing the stuff, even if it’s not yet ready! The issue that you found is definitely one that needs to be sorted out sooner or later. Either by changing the Harbour rules, or by changing the Sailjail instructions.
I was curious, since it’s not in the permissions guide mentioned if sailjailing will require code reorganization? The java reference I made … I would guess, not?
Oh, we are supposed to get emails? That would be great!
I keep having to poll harbour for notifications.
Yes, but i wouldn’t have asked if it wasn’t because it had passed QA 3 times with this behaviour, and i assume people will lose their settings now.
But I’ll revert then, no worries… just a bit confused.
Hi @vige. As I read your blog post about Sailjail today, it is the right time to start experimenting with it, right? It there any draft for the new Harbour rules related to Sailjail? And migration guide?
I’m not setting OrganizationName in desktop file nor Qt code now. It works with Sailjail in SFOS 4.2, but my application is loosing access to ~/.config/<app-name>. When I setup organization name, configuration is mounted from ~/.config/<organization>/<app-name>, that needs migration and organization needs to start with harbour- to comply today’s Harbour rules…
Yes, now is the time to start experimenting. Actually, the new Harbour rules are already in place. So you can already submit apps with sandboxing profiles to Harbour, but the profiles won’t have any effect yet. And the organization name does not have to start with harbour
As for migration - yes, we definitely should write some kind of guide. For now, I think the best thing to do is to just move the configuration files from the old directory to the new. It’s easy to do as your applications are not yet sandboxed.
[defaultuser@Xperia ~]$ /usr/bin/sailjail -p harbour-osmscout.desktop /usr/bin/harbour-osmscout 2>&1
[sailjail] ERROR: Invalid value harbour-osmscout for ApplicationName
[defaultuser@Xperia ~]$ version
Sailfish OS 4.2.0.21 (Verla)
I may change app name it to OSMScout, but does it comply with Harbour rules? It will not match to HARBOUR_APP_NAME (as used in FAQ) then and it is kind of weird. It is necessary to match with name set by QCoreApplication::setApplicationName ?
Yes, changing the name to OSMScout complies with the Harbour rules. The FAQ needs updating - I’m quite sure we have an open task about that. It is necessary to match the application name set in the code, but then again you don’t have to set it in the code. If you use libsailfishapp (like most Sailfish apps should), it will take care of setting the application name.
TIL: You need to remove X-Nemo-Application-Type=silica-qt5 or it will try (and fail) to boost sailjail itself.
Edit: only when testing with sailjail as the executable.
@vige I have last remaining issue. When I am using QSettings instance for storing application configuration (created with default constructor), it is using ~/.config/<organizationName>/<appName>.conf file, but Sailjail is creating and whitelisting ~/.config/<organizationName>/<appName> directory. Is there any global possibility to say QSettings to use config file in different directory? Or Sailjail to whitelist specific file?
So, I setup organization name (cz.karry.osmscout), prepare code for migration of configuration and new release was rejected, because:
Your application is creating misnamed folder under /home/defaultuser/.cache/cz.karry.osmscout and /home/defaultuser/.config/cz.karry.osmscout and /home/defaultuser/.local/share/cz.karry.osmscout. Folder name must be harbour-osmscout.
We will need some time (at least one application release) when applications will be using new locations, but still be running without sailjail - to make migration possible. Is there any plan when Harbour rules will be updated?
Yes there is. I’m literally working on it right now. I hope we can get the new rules in place within a week. Of course, one should always expect the unexpected, and this is kind of busy week for us, so things might get delayed a bit, but anyway soon™
I kid. Sort of.
