KDBUS Merging Prospects Get Debated

[TheBlackCat]

I don't think anybody said anything about stupidly simple. In fact everybody wants a capable init whether they know it or not. But systemd aint that, it's a whole lot more then that.

And what you, and many other members of the anti-systemd crowd, fail to understand is that a lot of people want something that is "a whole lot more than that". You don't, that's fine. But you are not everybody.

[Nobi]

That is how kdbus works too.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't do read()/write() nor any socket systemcall on kdbus virtual filesystem.

[TheBlackCat]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't do read()/write() nor any socket systemcall on kdbus virtual filesystem.

It appears this is indeed the case. My apologies. Although it does seem this could be added if there was sufficient interest.

[psychoticmeow]

It appears this is indeed the case. My apologies. Although it does seem this could be added if there was sufficient interest.

Yeah, I installed kdbus to see if it worked, but it doesn't. I wonder if making it possible would help get it merged, but I suspect that there's enough code already that needs reviewing.

[TheBlackCat]

Yeah, I installed kdbus to see if it worked, but it doesn't. I wonder if making it possible would help get it merged, but I suspect that there's enough code already that needs reviewing.

According to a lwn article, nobody seemed interested in the feature. I think if it would make a difference in getting it merged, it would be implemented. However, I have read the mailing list threads and don't recall any of the reviewers mentioning it.