From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QyMxA-0006dC-Qz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:58:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 854CC21C1A7; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.virtyou.com (mx.virtyou.com [94.23.166.77]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2E021C03F for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:56:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from weird.localnet (xdsl-78-35-144-192.netcologne.de [78.35.144.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.virtyou.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6F4F3D60E6 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:56:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Alex Schuster To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] systemd Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:56:44 +0200 Message-ID: <5110656.sT3Fo8umsr@weird> Organization: Wonkology User-Agent: KMail/4.7.0 (Linux/2.6.38-pf8; KDE/4.7.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <3706961.X6WvuNeq9m@nazgul> References: <4E4C2CC4.6080604@xunil.at> <0D8B951A-06D1-43B8-BD6D-46E7CB059746@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <3706961.X6WvuNeq9m@nazgul> 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: a29fabd86c7109cf923b13152574d36a Alan McKinnon writes: > On Tue 23 August 2011 18:17:17 Stroller did opine thusly: > > On 23 August 2011, at 07:27, Joost Roeleveld wrote: [...] > > > And I don't really see the point of D-BUS on a server either. > > > All the services that need to talk to each other already have > > > working communication paths. > > > > Reading that blog entry I found discouraging the idea that dbus > > might be required on my servers in the future, if systemd becomes > > popular with distros. > > What's your objection to dbus? It gives you a standard message bus, is > small, light, consumes minimal resources and provides a nice standard > way to do IPC. Probably easier than reinventing the wheel with named > pipes and other bits over and over. Except for me. dbus-daemon often uses 10-20% of my CPU according to top. And this morning, it was using about 750M of memory. Which is less than kwin's and Kontact's usage, but still. But I think the problem is on my side, I run KDE4 with only 8G of memory, no wonder I need 1.7G of swap right now. Wonko