Re: dbus - Was: A thread that shouldn't be mentioned anymore
> D-Bus is good overall...
The good thing about standard IPC was that you would have to develop
the protocol etc.. which means if your app used it.
1./ You needed to use it otherwise you wouldn't.
2./ You made an app specific mechanism (very good if your good but
could be bad, the latter is what dbus tackles)
The problem with dbus isn't dbus, it is that developers are becoming a
big problem because they are using it way too much as a first choice.
You should only use dbus when you need to. Some software is
unfortunately encouraging this and in turn other bad practices.
Take Windows, atleast XP (I haven't looked so close since but I expect
little has changed in this department), Scripts have to be enabled to
activate XP and IPC is required for almost everything. Try switching
off RPC (prepare to reboot to re-enable it), and guess what, Windows is
completely unreliable and insecure.
Polkit instead of sudo, IPC and scripts when neither are required or a
good choice. The reason for IPC, because it wasn't designed for just the
task that sudo does. Why polkit is used rather than sudo because polkits
author helped write the odd script like pm-suspend and is in with the
udisks author. What I really don't get though is why there are so many
easily avoidable hard dependencies.
'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a