Systemd 221 Fixes Bugs, Wants Distributions To Start Shipping KDBUS

[Guest]

kdbus is created by a Linux kernel developer, GKH.

This is a false, gkh is merely a kernel side maintainer, kay sievers is main developer behind systemd (&co= Mack, Herrman, ..., others).

[Guest]

Getting things tested in real-world situations is important. I think this is a great idea for KDBUS. Maybe distributions will discover that it crashes or that it doesn't speed things up. That would be good to know before it comes out in an official kernel release.

Doesn't really matter, distributions lag behind kernel release cycle by about 6-12 months. Also, kdbus has quite a bit of testing behind it already, quite a few people are using it for almost a year now.

[Stellarwind]

kdbus is created by a Linux kernel developer, GKH.

Not really, owning a repo on github doesn't makes him a creator. Besides Linus refused to work with Sievers and rest of systemd cowboys, so he had to take over the task of pushing it through.

As for speed - Linus doesn't seem to be convinced there is much benefit in it.

[finalzone]

This is a false, gkh is merely a kernel side maintainer, kay sievers is main developer behind systemd (&co= Mack, Herrman, ..., others).

If you took the time to read, I was talking about kdbus itself that systemd enabled support.

[Guest]

Soooo, it is compile-time optional? *confused*
Anyway, depending on a "not mainlined" Kernel feature is really dumb.

It compiles in by default and enables itself by default when kdbus kernel module is present.
In the past, even with --enable-kdbus switch enabled, you still had to pass "kdbus" onto kernels commandline to activate it on boot.

[duby229]

kdbus is created by a Linux kernel developer, GKH.

I understand that, but he has distanced himself. Just read the logs. Honestly I think it's been pretty civil, but it's clear that kdbus is not wanted in the kernel by the majority.

[finalzone]

Not really, owning a repo on github doesn't makes him a creator. Besides Linus refused to work with Sievers and rest of systemd cowboys, so he had to take over the task of pushing it through.

Linus suspend Sievers only due to the latter conduct: http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/...4.0/01331.html
Show where in Linus mail blamed the "rest of systemd cowboys" you claimed.
You are right that some kdbus ideas are from Sievers but the implementation is done by GKH. Let remind that kdbus is also used by Tizen https://review.tizen.org/git/?p=plat...eads/kdbus-dev

[k1l_]

And another one, where the poettering mafia enforces their projects upon the users.

"told you so" gets really worn out with that guys. but seems like the linux-community just wants it that way.

[Guest]

"It's primarily a bugfix release"

git diff v219..v220 --stat
[..]
972 files changed, 50411 insertions(+), 25029 deletions(-)

git diff v220..v221 --stat
[..]
704 files changed, 58118 insertions(+), 54545 deletions(-)

220 was feature release? 221 is quite large as a bug fix release

[finalzone]

I understand that, but he has distanced himself. Just read the logs. Honestly I think it's been pretty civil, but it's clear that kdbus is not wanted in the kernel by the majority.

Show where that "majority does not want kdbus" when the last review for including in kernel 4.1 was done one month after the last commit on kdbus github:

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1504.2/index.html#04853

Only arguments from the whole mailing list -> kdbus needs further review