| 1 |
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 19:30 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: |
| 2 |
> * Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr: |
| 3 |
> > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100 |
| 5 |
> > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > > /bin/systemctl |
| 7 |
> > > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3 |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really be |
| 10 |
> > > called "a horrible mess of tight coupling"... |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > You clearly have failed to realize that d-bus is a now the bus for |
| 13 |
> > system messaging and is as much part of the system as syslog or bash. |
| 14 |
> > Probably even more so, for example, in Fedora 17, you'll be able to boot |
| 15 |
> > without syslog or bash, but you need d-bus. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> If this was true, we will soon have problems with linux systems that |
| 18 |
> windows had in 1995. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> IMO a system should *always* be bootable without that "high level" |
| 21 |
> stuff. And by bootable I mean that you can get a root prompt at |
| 22 |
> least. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
d-bus is not high-level stuff... For example, you can't use bluetooth |
| 25 |
without d-bus. Even Android has it.. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That said, in the new systemd world, bash is.. Since it's only a "UI" |
| 28 |
tools (just like gnome-shell for example). Since you don't need it to |
| 29 |
boot. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Olivier Crête |
| 34 |
tester@g.o |
| 35 |
Gentoo Developer |
Archives