Hey there, seeing there will be a new JP2, I figured that I could (as a personal exercize) attempt to upgrade the Quickbar app (at the moment non-functional) to SFOS5. To take the fun out of it, I will blog about my ramblings and (dis-)adventures in this (otherwise meaningless perhaps :D) endeavour!
Feel free to follow the progress on my blog if you fancy a small read. And feel free to post here if you have suggestions for any of the problems I face (thanks for that in advance!).
Cheers!
Ah, that Ovi-Store. I still have my N900 in almost mint condition 
Great to see you diving in again!
Some quick progress here . SDK Update, and digging deeper to the issue, its pointing towards the sdk layers. WIP!
Another entry in the blog series! Now with a (solved) missing argument mystery due to deprecation,and some help from the (MER) past! Enjoy the read! PS: Thank God for the MER documentation 
Yet another entry (Im on a roll :D) : SailJail integration!
Yet anoter post (I know you were all waiting for it :D)!
Only this time, we might have hit a sunken rock at the libcontentaction level.
See here the post. @pvuorela hello, I know you have worked on libcontentaction before; would you know if it is expected for a SailJail’ed app to not be able to detect the /usr/bin/invoker file? It appears the libcontentaction does that, and because of that, triggering actions via libcontentaction in Quickbar (or I guess in any other SailJail’ed app) fails…is there a new way to do so?
Note that lca-tool from terminal has no issues (then again terminal has no SailJail..)
On a quick look starting random apps with the invoker doesn’t feel that compatible with sandboxing. Maybe you should just disable the sandboxing for this, i.e. .desktop “[X-Sailjail] \n Sandboxing=Disabled”
Very quick reply, thank you!
My target would be to be able to publish Quickbar through harbour; I guess that might make it tricky without Sandbox?
Yea, harbour requires sandboxing, but I wonder if this is even otherwise compatible with harbour. Extra toolbar on homescreen smells like special stuff and maybe some patching too?
Surprisingly, everything works no patches or similar so far (even from sailjail)
Edit: @pvuorela if libcontentaction is not “friendly” with SailJail (due to invoker dependency), what is the / is there an alternative way to launch apps from SailJail?
Unfortunately don’t think there are alternatives. Sandboxed apps shouldn’t even know about the existence of others.
Would that mean that requesting other applications from one (for example opening an audio file from a file browser, or a downloaded file..) is not a use-case as such for jailed apps? Just asking here to understand better the design
Quickbar per-se doesnt need to know of the existence of other apps as such.
It basically just relies on mimes / desktop entries.
On opening files the triggering app is not requesting anyone specific but rather asking the system that a file would be opened. Which apps are available or selected does not get signalled back.
And thats in principle enough for Quickbar, for example.
But I assume the invoker will be included in the sandbox at some point?
No plans on inclusion. Don’t see why apps should be really needing that. If we needed to allow launching apps from apps, I’d rather have, say, some D-Bus API that asks to launch by .desktop file.
Yeah; I noticed actually lipstick seems to have such an api already.
However, priviledged group membership is required. Makes sense, of course.
Great to keep the control in the user’s hands!
I happened to notice the AppLaunch permission; is that something accepted in Harbour?
EDIT : apparently not
Yea, not sure is that AppLaunch actually even used. Contains systemd service stuff. Also not right away sure where was that lipstick launchProcess() used (well spotted btw).
It might be an option that some day we’ll get into these more special permissions but let’s see.
where was that lipstick launchProcess() used (well spotted btw).
Oh no, is it going to be removed now?
No plans on removal either It’s privileged so no much harm. Might be even used somewhere, just don’t remember right away.
@pvuorela the launchProcess in lipstick is used for re-raising windows only. Bummer.
I guess a d-bus service is the next best thing; running as a “privileged” service…
EDIT: There would be MRemoteAction which could be a good entry point, perhaps. At least on the client side..