| 1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> - only Linux has udev. Other OSes may not need, want or be willing to touch |
| 4 |
> udev with a bargepole. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Yes, udev is linux only. Replace udev with whatever is available on |
| 7 |
other platforms in that diagram. I just used linux as an example... |
| 8 |
Sorry for not making it clear. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> But you have that in the current setup. Hal (for better or worse) is the |
| 11 |
> daemon. dbus is simply a message transport and can be omitted from the |
| 12 |
> conceptual diagram |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Why is dbus needed? Why can't the user space apps talk to the user space |
| 15 |
daemon directly? To me it's just another unnecessary layer, each layer |
| 16 |
needs some kind of translation and thus resources. To me hal or whatever |
| 17 |
may replace it should have a minimalist approach. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> You could be forced to use Windows... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Well, the way I see it, some people/projects are aiming to create a new |
| 22 |
"Windows". |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
But I'm doing a "don Quijote" here... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Best regards |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Peter K |
Archives