Re: in-kernel messaging (was Re: brasero requires gvfs)
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014, Joel Rees wrote:
> dbus/kdbus is actually another case of re-inventing bad solutions, and
> getting things more wrong the second time.
>
> Admitted, it's often better to do something not-quite-right than do nothing
> at all, but forgetting that there is a better way is not a good thing
> either.
https://lwn.net/Articles/405346/
https://lwn.net/Articles/484203/
https://lwn.net/Articles/580194/
https://lwn.net/Articles/537017/
https://lwn.net/Articles/551969/
It should give you guys some background on kernel mode DBUS, the
controversies behind it, etc. Be sure to read the comments as well.
Note that this won't cover the design of DBUS itself. But keep in mind that
some of the modern uses of DBUS are very unlikely to be compatible with its
original design goals.
Which doesn't mean its original design was stellar. DBUS does stink of NIH
syndrome to high heaven, regardless of whether it deserves it or not.
Still, it is necessary to look at what were the in-use alternatives at the
time: I have this hunch that people flocked to DBUS because they were
running away from the likes of CORBA.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: