Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE, GNOME, Unity, Razor-Qt Developers Met Up

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Systemd requiring a Desktop Bus is an example of things gone horribly wrong. Init! Requiring another daemon!

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Teho View Post
      We should have kdbus ("kernel dbus") before the end of the year that makes it fast, lean and daemon-less.

      D-Bus is available for BSDs. According to Greg K-H some BSD developers are interested in kdbus too.
      Why not just plumber from Plan 9 instead?

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by uid313 View Post
        Why not just plumber from Plan 9 instead?
        Because everyone and their mother is already using dbus. You really expect everyone to just drop it and switch to something else? Do you have any idea how many applications would have to be reprogrammed? What advantage would there be, anyway?

        Somehow I doubt that the people who hate the idea of another daemon are going to be happy running an entire file server just to get IPC.
        Last edited by TheBlackCat; 04-19-2013, 07:39 PM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Banu22elos View Post
          lets hope they come to agree on something.
          Read again. The meeting already took place.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by curaga View Post
            Systemd requiring a Desktop Bus is an example of things gone horribly wrong. Init! Requiring another daemon!
            D-Bus was never really called a "desktop bus" and many server components including print servers like cups and dns resolvers like bind have d-bus support these days. In either case, systemd doesn't require D-Bus the daemon to be running. It uses libdbus, the library. These are not the same thing although it is a common source of confusion for end users apparently.

            Comment

            Working...
            X