| 1 |
(renaming, because it feels like a rant thread is inevitable) |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Stroller |
| 5 |
>> Reading that blog entry I found discouraging the idea that dbus might be required on my servers in the future, if systemd becomes popular with distros. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't see the problem with D-Bus. It's small (the only hard |
| 8 |
> dependency it has is an XML parser), and it provides the Linux/UNIX |
| 9 |
> (de facto) standard interprocess communication system. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
My chief gripe with D-Bus is that I've had X sessions disappear out |
| 12 |
from under me as a consequence of the daemon being restarted. Having a |
| 13 |
single point of failure like that is very, very scary. Otherwise, I |
| 14 |
like what it tries to do. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
:wq |
Archives