Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: GNOME Wants To Sandbox Applications Too

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    So the gnome and systemd cabal is pushing for an IPC mechanism in the kernel. Performance, security and features are probable gains. Can this go to mainline linux? Maybe. Attempts have failed before but this time it is another story.

    Does everybody want a linux IPC to rule them all? I doubt it.
    There you have Android's "binder" IPC. But they probably want something more powerful like d-bus

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andresmi View Post
    Ugh, I see no benefits and only downsides. It will be even slower, introduce new bugs, and provide no real security IMO. But this seems to be the trend in gnome, let's take what works well, break it, remove any useful features, add a 1000 new bugs, do tons of random pointless things, add features that are broken and useless and make it run as slow as humanly possible.


    Ok, maybe I am exaggerating a bit. I have just gotten more and more annoyed with this sort of #@*(Y&(# over the last few years.

    Hey I got an idea, let's have all gnome apps written in a new scripting language, let's called it Magic Gnome Script, (MGS), that script is then interpreted threw a runner, written in javascript, running inside a special gnome app viewer, running in a virtual environment, running inside...
    So instead of standing by the sideline, participate. Within GNOME we already work together with kernel developers and we will reach out to other desktop environments. We also track bugs using Bugzilla for many years, so 1000 new bugs is verified to be not true at all.

    In any case, everything you say is obvious bullshit.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andresmi View Post
    Ugh, I see no benefits and only downsides. It will be even slower, introduce new bugs, and provide no real security IMO. But this seems to be the trend in gnome, let's take what works well, break it, remove any useful features, add a 1000 new bugs, do tons of random pointless things, add features that are broken and useless and make it run as slow as humanly possible.
    I think the big benefit is that you might actually get ISVs to package their applications for Linux. The current status is highly sub-optimal, as you are probably aware of.
    I don't think the ability to run applications that are not packaged this way is going away.
    Slower? Seems like there will be some magic going on when the app is started, but after that there shouldn't be any performance hit. Unless you have read something I missed, in which case you are welcome to enlighten me.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    The current status is highly sub-optimal, as you are probably aware of.
    It is MUCH worse than that. Probaly more like "shitty fucked poo". Having N distros packaging 10^X packages is so wrong on so many levels that I cry. Give me a bundle and give me a sandboxed enviroment to contain any stupidity. No more is needed. Systemd and in-kernel IPC(dbus as already suggested) is like 90% of the work.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •