unity-api-bugs team mailing list archive
-
unity-api-bugs team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #05649
[Bug 1367871] [NEW] ubuntu-app-launch doesn't pass arguments to the executable
Public bug reported:
Many applications currently use command line arguments to run in
different modes. For example, we have reminders that receives -s to
start using the sandbox, and some other arguments to decide the geometry
of the app if it's being run on a platform that has a screen big enough.
The problem is that when launching the app with ubuntu-app-launch
reminders -s, that -s will be dropped. u-a-l will just execute the exec
line on the desktop file. So if we need to launch evernote with the
sandbox, we will need to write a different desktop file.
I find it really useful to be able to launch applications with different
modes by passing an argument. It makes it really simple to test the
different modes on the same manual testing session. It also makes it
simple to automate tests that require certain conditions, for example
running the same tests twice on desktop, once in landscape mode and once
in portrait mode; that way we will reduce the number of errors we find
while running on the real hardware.
We even have a handler for arguments on our API: http://developer.ubuntu.com/api/qml/sdk-14.10/Ubuntu.Components.Arguments/
So it seems that we are encouraging the apps to use it. But then we are not able to launch them easily with those arguments.
Ted thinks that UI apps shouldn't receive command line arguments, and
that we should remove that from the API. (I'll ping Ted to comment on
this bug so he talks for himself, I might have missed some details on
this statement).
Some alternatives are:
- to write desktop files for each argument on the fly during automated tests.
- to include desktop files for alternate modes on the click packages.
- use environment variables instead of arguments.
I'm reporting this bug so we can discuss about the best approach.
** Affects: autopilot
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Affects: ubuntu-app-launch
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Affects: ubuntu-ui-toolkit
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: autopilot
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ubuntu-ui-toolkit
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Unity API
bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu Application Launcher.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1367871
Title:
ubuntu-app-launch doesn't pass arguments to the executable
Status in Autopilot:
New
Status in Ubuntu Application Launcher:
New
Status in Ubuntu UI Toolkit:
New
Bug description:
Many applications currently use command line arguments to run in
different modes. For example, we have reminders that receives -s to
start using the sandbox, and some other arguments to decide the
geometry of the app if it's being run on a platform that has a screen
big enough.
The problem is that when launching the app with ubuntu-app-launch
reminders -s, that -s will be dropped. u-a-l will just execute the
exec line on the desktop file. So if we need to launch evernote with
the sandbox, we will need to write a different desktop file.
I find it really useful to be able to launch applications with
different modes by passing an argument. It makes it really simple to
test the different modes on the same manual testing session. It also
makes it simple to automate tests that require certain conditions, for
example running the same tests twice on desktop, once in landscape
mode and once in portrait mode; that way we will reduce the number of
errors we find while running on the real hardware.
We even have a handler for arguments on our API: http://developer.ubuntu.com/api/qml/sdk-14.10/Ubuntu.Components.Arguments/
So it seems that we are encouraging the apps to use it. But then we are not able to launch them easily with those arguments.
Ted thinks that UI apps shouldn't receive command line arguments, and
that we should remove that from the API. (I'll ping Ted to comment on
this bug so he talks for himself, I might have missed some details on
this statement).
Some alternatives are:
- to write desktop files for each argument on the fly during automated tests.
- to include desktop files for alternate modes on the click packages.
- use environment variables instead of arguments.
I'm reporting this bug so we can discuss about the best approach.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/autopilot/+bug/1367871/+subscriptions
Follow ups
References