From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9740C1381F3 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 02:17:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9BCE3E09F5; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 02:17:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpout.karoo.kcom.com (smtpout.karoo.kcom.com [212.50.160.34]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AA5E09B2 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 02:17:27 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,732,1367967600"; d="scan'208";a="25640844" Received: from unknown (HELO rathaus.eclipse.co.uk) ([109.176.242.46]) by smtpout.karoo.kcom.com with ESMTP; 24 Jul 2013 03:17:26 +0100 Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 03:17:51 +0100 From: "Steven J. Long" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Fresh install and problem with net.* init.d script Message-ID: <20130724021751.GB1792@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <81cd8b64fd20f43855a535a449411a58@drakonix.fr> <51EDA7DB.90900@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51EDA7DB.90900@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 0e85384e-8b0a-41b2-b968-0e8fc5b9c0e9 X-Archives-Hash: 439cf6a9e3c178bf3ccd6750886de6af Alan McKinnon wrote: > dbus is NOT a desktop daemon. This is very important, and that single > misunderstanding is probably behind all the fud you read about it. > > dbus implements a message bus - an amazingly useful thing to have. > > Why do you need or want a message bus? > > You might as well ask why do you need or want any other form of IPC you > already have, as that is what dbus is. It's a very small, light daemon, > can run system-wide or per-session and has the potential to many of the > IPC implementations you already have. Those are the ones that don't > happen to show up in ps so you hear very little whinging about them. You might as well just use the existing IPC mechanisms too, especially on a server. Oh wait, that would take experience and the humility borne of it. > That desktop systems are the main user of dbus at this point in time > doesn't change one bit what dbus is designed to do and it's usefulness. Actually it was designed to be a desktop bus. That its mission has crept, or arguably the "developer" has made a land-grab, doesn't change that. Note I am not saying anything at all about the technical merits of dbus itself. I actually quite like the base protocol, just not all the crap on top of it. Kinda how I feel about the Java VM, fwtw. Regards, steveL -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)