On Vi, 12 dec 14, 11:35:03, berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote: > > So, you have to choose between: > _ having a daemon running everytime, and an application which needs to > listen at it's socket everytime (I guess it's how dbus works? If someone > have any clue about this part of internal, I would be happy to learn), but > which have a more flexible way to send messages (not tied to a protocol? I'm > not that sure, but I suppose it can at least support non-standard messages), > which is something I do not like: if the daemon crash, for a reason or > another, or is exposed to a security issue, it's all applications using it > which are in danger. In my very humble opinion (I'm not a programmer), applications should probably treat the message bus similar to network access: - if not available handle it gracefully - treat everything that comes from it as potentially dangerous > Plus, it's not portable. The authors claim otherwise. This might be interesting reading (though it seems slightly outdated to me): http://dbus.freedesktop.org/doc/dbus-faq.html Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature