On 19 Mar, J Peachey wrote in message
<
6ab5978...@user.orpheusmail.co.uk>:
> In message <
5a86cc90...@avisoft.f9.co.uk>
> Martin <
New...@avisoft.f9.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I can see no evidence that Pinboard2 will boot anything - can Chris
> > clarify exactly where in Pinboard2 there was a reference to !MuView, and
> > what evidence is there that it runs the !MuView !boot file?
>
> > I am intrigued if I am being blind!
>
> The !Muview claimed the filetype whilst it was on the Pinboard, and didn't
> when removed from the Pinboard would suggest that the module does run the
> boot files of any apps.
The source code is a little impenetrable and not that well commented, but
there's an fs_boot_application() function in fs.c which appears to boot an
application, and it *appears* from a very cursory look to be called when
things are pinned to the pinboard using *Pin and *XPin.
This is actually a fairly common problem with application launchers, as an
application needs to be booted, or at the very least have its sprites passed
to *IconSprites, in order for its icons to look correct when the launcher is
viewed by the user. In Launcher I offer the options of "Boot", "Load
sprites" or "Do nothing" for precisely this reason (and "Load sprites" would
be the one that Chris would want to apply for MuView).
So, yes, I think that apps pinned to Pinboard 2 will probably be booted. As
I said, I could be wrong. I don't (yet) use Pinboard 2.
If both apps are on the new pinboard, it looks as if another solution for
Chris might be to ensure that in whatever configuration file is being
created, the *(X)Pin command for PDF appears before the *(X)Pin command for
MuView. As far as I can tell, Pinboard 2 boots things in the order that they
are added to the backdrop.