xfconf gdbus port (GValue vs GVariant)

Matthew Brush mbrush at codebrainz.ca
Fri Mar 25 01:59:57 CET 2016

On 2016-03-24 05:01 PM, flo.xfce at gmx-topmail.de wrote:
> I would not say that GSettings is more lightweight than xfconf. Usually

I meant as a whole it's more "lightweight" since the alternative is to 
have both GSettings in GLib and Xfconf library and both of their 
respective daemons/backends.

> it works together with dconf as backend for persistent storage.
> Nevertheless, this would be one module less we have to maintain.
> The bigger problem I see with GSettings/dconf is its binary storage.
> xfconf comes with xml files and from what I heard in the community this
> is considered a big advantage over other settings backends.

I can't comment on the issues with binary storage, but I assume it would 
be more efficient to parse binary files than parsing XML. I have no idea 
if this is significant or not though, I haven't done any kind of profiling.

> Porting to GSettings would be quite a big tasks, nearly every module
> currently relies on xfconf.

Would be easy for Mousepad application, it already uses GSettings :) But 
yeah, it would be a big job unless someone could make an Xfconf 
compatibility wrapper that sat ontop of GSettings or something.

Matthew Brush

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list