[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 9p/plumber to replace D-Bus?

Le 08.12.2014 14:18, Marty a écrit :
I almost tagged this off-topic but it's directed toward ordinary Debian
users (with developer backgrounds). I first raised this on
modular-debian but I want to get some ideas from a wider audience.

I'm starting to get familiar with Plan 9 and D-Bus, to compare how they
try to solve the same set of problems.

Plan 9 concepts attempt to solve Unix problems in a very different
way than Opendesktop.org. For people wanting to return to the original Unix concepts, 9p/plumber (or an updated version) seems like a natural fit going forward, for basic IPC purposes. 9p is already in Linux, and
probably could be ported to the other Debian ports.

I realize I just have to convince millions of people to re-plumb their core OS in a short period of time, but recent history teaches us that it
that this is entirely feasible! Thus emboldened, I would even deign
to give users a choice in the matter, but realistically, this would
probably be an experimental project.

You won't convince anyone if you do not build a PoC. Especially developers giving their time literally for free. Asking questions is a nice way to learn how you could do that PoC, anyway. Asking and trying.

Could an IPC bridge/shim mechanism connect to a new IPC model while apps
and DE's migrate from D-Bus, or support both optionally? I can see an
updated version of Plumber might be needed, and things might be
simplified by other aspects of the Plan 9 paradigm, like per-process
namespaces and treating everything as a file.

Multi-seat PC and other
anachronisms probably have to go away.

As Lisi asked, what about choice? How could you say that those are anachronisms, too? Perl guys are used to say this: "there is more than one way to achieve it". This can be applied to so many things.

About anachronism... you should read about what is the minitel*, and then, consider thinking about how most people uses their computers ;)

*: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minitel

Reply to: