After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 686136 - Better warning and error messages.
Better warning and error messages.
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: baobab
Classification: Core
Component: general
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Baobab Maintainers
Baobab Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-10-15 07:42 UTC by Lapo Calamandrei
Modified: 2017-11-19 15:37 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
window: Be more specific when reporting scanning errors (1.76 KB, patch)
2012-10-15 09:00 UTC, Stefano Facchini
committed Details | Review
Improve scanner error handling. (3.65 KB, patch)
2012-10-15 09:39 UTC, Stefano Facchini
rejected Details | Review
The situation at this time (124.73 KB, image/png)
2013-07-07 13:04 UTC, mariolinux
  Details
A better solution with all the parent folders in orange (124.89 KB, image/png)
2013-07-07 13:08 UTC, mariolinux
  Details

Description Lapo Calamandrei 2012-10-15 07:42:33 UTC
At the moment when analysing / the wording of the warning presented in the infobar is vauge and not very usefull to the user. It says: 'Could not scan folder "/" or some of the folders containing it. Permission denied'.
It doesn't tell the user the what happens when that warning is present and it would be better to have an error if you can't scan the whole root folder (thinking about remote folders or volumes) and a warning if you can't scan some subfolder also.
Comment 1 Stefano Facchini 2012-10-15 09:00:40 UTC
Created attachment 226443 [details] [review]
window: Be more specific when reporting scanning errors

Use a warning message for subfolder error, an error message
for top folder error.
Comment 2 Stefano Facchini 2012-10-15 09:06:12 UTC
It seems to me that we should also move away from using GErrors to control execution flow, since they are not meant to report recoverable errors.

I'm talking about the block

try {
    scanner.finish ()
} catch () {
     ...
}
Comment 3 Paolo Borelli 2012-10-15 09:36:25 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> It seems to me that we should also move away from using GErrors to control
> execution flow, since they are not meant to report recoverable errors.

Why? Sure they are meant for recoverable errors, just thing of g_file_create and handling G_IO_ERROR_EXISTS
Comment 4 Paolo Borelli 2012-10-15 09:39:26 UTC
Review of attachment 226443 [details] [review]:

Patch looks ok as a first step once we branch.

Though we probably need even better messages.

Also we should make the location in the list insensitive and maybe display an hint if we detect the location root is not accessible
Comment 5 Stefano Facchini 2012-10-15 09:39:35 UTC
Created attachment 226444 [details] [review]
Improve scanner error handling.

Use a warning message for subfolder error, an error message
for top folder error.



---

Another version, based on a new error domain 'ScannerError'
Comment 6 mariolinux 2013-07-07 12:37:57 UTC
Currently, in the treeview, the inaccessible location is shown in red and the parent folder in orange, but if it is nested in other folders is hard to find.
It would be better if all parent directories were orange.
Comment 7 mariolinux 2013-07-07 13:04:55 UTC
Created attachment 248543 [details]
The situation at this time
Comment 8 mariolinux 2013-07-07 13:08:45 UTC
Created attachment 248544 [details]
A better solution with all the parent folders in orange

This is related to the proposal at comment 6 (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=686136#c6)
Comment 9 Stefano Facchini 2013-07-08 09:14:08 UTC
Pushed a fix implementing the behavior in comment 6 (which was the 
original intended behavior anyway...)
Comment 10 Stefano Facchini 2013-07-08 09:16:58 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> Pushed a fix implementing the behavior in comment 6 (which was the 
> original intended behavior anyway...)

commit 99de9a331f7371e0db90d5a8e4298facdb198531
Comment 11 André Klapper 2014-04-07 13:07:35 UTC
Patch has "accepted-commit_after_freeze" status for 18 months now - please commit?
Comment 12 André Klapper 2014-05-18 09:57:48 UTC
Patch has "accepted-commit_after_freeze" status for 18 months now - please
commit?
Comment 13 Stefano Facchini 2014-05-19 12:12:44 UTC
Comment on attachment 226443 [details] [review]
window: Be more specific when reporting scanning errors

Attachment 226443 [details] pushed as bc3deb0 - window: Be more specific when reporting scanning errors
Comment 14 Alexandre Franke 2017-11-19 15:37:38 UTC
Patches have been pushed, marking as fixed. Feel free to reopen if anything is missing.