Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDBUS To Be Included In The Linux 4.1 Kernel

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

  • Adarion
    replied
    Originally posted by Rallos Zek View Post
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/14/461
    That is what happens when you let scum like Red Hat work on good things like the Linux Kernel. Red Hat gave us the poison that is systemd and now are trying to infect the kernel itself.
    What finalzone said and:
    While I agree that Redhat's forced introduction of systemd is not a beautiful matter - Greg KH ist not Redhat - at least not that I know. Greg is Gentoo, SuSE and whatsnot. And a general kernel / driver developer and maintainer.

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by Rallos Zek View Post
    That is what happens when you let scum like Red Hat work on good things like the Linux Kernel. Red Hat gave us the poison that is systemd and now are trying to infect the kernel itself.
    Do you realize kdbus is created by Greg Kroah-Hartman, the official kernel stable maintainer and Linux Foundation employee?

    Leave a comment:


  • Adarion
    replied
    Does anybody know how well this can be used by userland today? I mean, userland supports dbus very often these days, some actually depend on it. But what is with kdbus, could Kdbus replace dbus in an instant or will the upstream userland developers have to make many adaptions?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rallos Zek
    replied
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/14/461

    I find myself comparing kdbus to win32k, and that's not a good sign...

    That is what happens when you let scum like Red Hat work on good things like the Linux Kernel. Red Hat gave us the poison that is systemd and now are trying to infect the kernel itself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Naib
    replied
    One of the aeguements for putting it in kernel is speed. The counter to that is there are plenty of opportunities to improve the user land speed. That hasn't been addressed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Naib
    replied
    One of the aeguements for putting it in kernel is speed. The counter to that is there are plenty of opportunities to improve the user land speed. That hasn't been addressed.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    I'm sure he knows, but I'm questioning whether he's applying his knowledge of "what kind of code belongs in the kernel" at this point
    i'm questioning whether you are applying your knowledge of how to make sane judgements

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by zanny View Post
    I'm not sure the dbus guys understand
    i'm sure you have no idea what are you talking about in general and who is this dbus guy in particular

    Leave a comment:


  • RahulSundaram
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    I hope he goes wild and rants and calls everyone dumb, incompetent sons of bitches, then hacks away all weekend and announces his own god-sent IPC mechanism the following Monday. The world goes wild, just like it did when he made Git, and then it gets adopted by FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFlyBSD and OpenIndiana/Illumos.
    Moving from one source code management tool to another doesn't break your code but moving from one IPC to another will. So the problem isn't to design an "ideal" system but work with an existing IPC system and do it better. Greg KH pointed out that this is called kdbus and not kipc or something more generic for a reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • valeriodean
    replied
    LOL, look to the LKML: a lot of people join the party now!
    Apparently, the RFC is not good enough for some bosses, but when the GIT PULL appears, that is the right moment to show their face and to sign with an elegant NAK.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X