:: Re: [DNG] PSI+ (Qt) on XFCE (GTK) o…
Kezdőlap
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Szerző: kernel panic!
Dátum:  
Címzett: dng
Új témák: [DNG] XDG_RUNTIME_DIR [was Re: PSI+ (Qt) on XFCE (GTK) on Beowulf]
Tárgy: Re: [DNG] PSI+ (Qt) on XFCE (GTK) on Beowulf
Thanks all
Hello Guy's,

I solved this on this way:

Didier: "Don't know if it would work to add XDG_RUNTIME_DIR to this
file. That's just some black magic I would try."

"It works 4 me!" ;-)

¡Sigue libre!
Michael

Am 19.02.20 um 09:42 schrieb tom:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:30:11 +0100
> Didier Kryn <kryn@???> wrote:
>
>> Le 18/02/2020 à 10:02, kernel panic! a écrit :
>>> Hello freedom Heroes,
>>>
>>> i will use PSI+ on my Beowulf, XFCE. if i start it on XFCE "nothing
>>> happend" The "XDG Runtime Dir" never exist on GTK?
>>>
>>>
>>>> :~$ psi-plus
>>>> [20200218 9:25:18] W:QStandardPaths: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR not set,
>>>> defaulting to '/tmp/runtime-michael' (unknown:0, unknown)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Can i make this via hand? Or any other Idea?
>>>
>>> Thanks in Advaced
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>     Many XDG_*_DIR are declared in $HOME/.config/user-dirs.dirs
>>
>>     I know that if you want one of them to *not* be created, it
>> doesn't work to just delete the line; the only way is to declare it
>> as some already existing directory, eg $HOME.
>>
>>     Don't know if it would work to add XDG_RUNTIME_DIR to this file.
>> That's just some black magic I would try.
>>
>>     Happy if it helps.
>>
>>         Didier
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dng mailing list
>> Dng@???
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
> Hey, I don't know for sure if this is the same issue your having, but I
> have compiled psi-plus by hand on ASCII and been in contact with the
> devs. If you do it on ASCII you must set the chat type to BASIC not
> WEBKIT. This is because there is some javascript functions in the
> webkit edition that do not work with the older version of webkit that
> comes with ASCII. BASIC is fine enough for most cases and certainly a
> lot more ram efficient but this could also be fixed by someone
> adjusting the javascript to not use such new functions. It just not has
> been important enough to do yet for anyone and BASIC is good enough for
> most.
>