Re: dbus - Was: A thread that shouldn't be mentioned anymore
Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 19:29 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 07:21 -1000, Joel Roth wrote:
> > Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > > dbus often is a PITA!
> > >
> > > Do you have experience with dbus's predecessors, such as
> > > CORBA?
> > No. I guess a predecessor won't help, if applications depend on dbus,
> > such as jackd/jackdmp. I'm aware that I can use jackdmp without dbus,
> > since I'm already doing this and I read that others are able to handle
> > this dbus issue even when they run jack with dbus for sessions without
> > X, IIUC.
> Oops, perhaps you mean that they were less good :D. I confused it with
> the word "successor" and noticed it after I sent the mail.
Perhaps D-Bus is not good, but maybe it is less bad?
I'll go on the record in favor of configurability: good to
be able to opt out if you don't need it.
( /me doesn't know if he needs it or not. )