On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:05:58 +0100 Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote: > Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 14:57 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit : > > Worthwhile to read, definitely. > > Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a > service less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposite), or > that configuration files are less human-readable than shell scripts. Hmm, scripts written in certain languages may have simple DBus interfaces but it's by no means trivial to do asynchronous DBus operations in a shell script. dbus-send does immediate calls but if something is going to take longer than the usual DBus timeout, responding to a DBus signal requires something other than shell. So, depending on what needs to be accomplished and how long it is going to take, DBus does make services less scriptable simply because DBus just won't sit there and wait (and block) for hours. Within what DBus is meant to do, that's expected and correct. It just means that there is more work involved than simply waiting for /usr/sbin/foo to return in a single line shell script. Even with dbus-send, what may have been a 30 character one-line call in shell becomes a 120 character complex call with quoting issues and return-type-unmangling. It depends on the meaning of "scriptable" - with the strict meaning of the kind of shell scripts to which sysadmins have become familiar, then DBus really isn't scriptable except for v.simple operations. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpHiaBA49FdU.pgp
Description: PGP signature