[gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

I noticed some obnoxious-looking processes in my system:

$ ps axf
(...)
  367 ?        S      0:00 dbus-launch --autolaunch
899f609d1c39e4d202c179a7580e4b49 --binary-syntax --close-stderr
  368 ?        Ss     0:00 /usr/bin/dbus-daemon --fork --print-pid 5
--print-address 7 --session
  409 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/notification-daemon
  411 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi-bus-launcher
  415 ?        S      0:00  \_ /usr/bin/dbus-daemon
--config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf --nofork
--print-address 3
  417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session
  451 ?        S      0:00 /usr/libexec/gconfd-2

I don't use a DE, just plain openbox. I had a few xterms running and
also Opera, no other graphical app. The above processes appeared after
Opera was launched.
 Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session"?

gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.

On a related note, the session logs have this gem:

ERROR:object_proxy.cc(583)] Failed to call method:
org.freedesktop.UPower.GetDisplayDevice: object_path=
/org/freedesktop/UPower: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown:
The name org.freedesktop.UPower was not provided by any .service files

Why should this be considered an error? I don't have upower installed.
I don't want upower.

I understand this is not the kind of stuff most users care about.
Just wondering whether somebody else is somewhat bothered by this.

Jorge Almeida

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-14 09:32, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> I don't use a DE, just plain openbox. I had a few xterms running and
> also Opera, no other graphical app. The above processes appeared after
> Opera was launched.
>  Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session"?
> 
> gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.

You already know the answer: opera.  You probably use opera-bin, or you
just downloaded a binary opera blob.  Such blobs typically bundle all
their libraries, so I wouldn't be shocked to find something like
gnome-session running even if you haven't installed it with portage.

This (among other reasons) is why I was so happy to find Pale Moon.

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 09:32, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>
>>  Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session"?
>>
>> gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.
>
> You already know the answer: opera.  You probably use opera-bin, or you
> just downloaded a binary opera blob.  Such blobs typically bundle all

I'm using  www-client/opera-beta. I don't know about opera-bin. I try
to stick with portage whenever I can.

> their libraries, so I wouldn't be shocked to find something like
> gnome-session running even if you haven't installed it with portage.
>
> This (among other reasons) is why I was so happy to find Pale Moon.
>

I'm trying Opera because Firefox in my slow atom is a pig (cpu-wise,
not memory-wise). Opera looks reasonable, so far. Maybe I'll try Pale
Moon...

Jorge

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Mon, 14 Nov 2016 09:32:59 +0000
schrieb Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@gmail.com>:

> I noticed some obnoxious-looking processes in my system:
> 
> $ ps axf
> (...)
>   367 ?        S      0:00 dbus-launch --autolaunch
> 899f609d1c39e4d202c179a7580e4b49 --binary-syntax --close-stderr
>   368 ?        Ss     0:00 /usr/bin/dbus-daemon --fork --print-pid 5
> --print-address 7 --session
>   409 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/notification-daemon
>   411 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi-bus-launcher
>   415 ?        S      0:00  \_ /usr/bin/dbus-daemon
> --config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf --nofork
> --print-address 3
>   417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd
> --use-gnome-session 451 ?        S      0:00 /usr/libexec/gconfd-2
> 
> I don't use a DE, just plain openbox. I had a few xterms running and
> also Opera, no other graphical app. The above processes appeared after
> Opera was launched.
>  Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd
> --use-gnome-session"?
> 
> gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.
> 
> On a related note, the session logs have this gem:
> 
> ERROR:object_proxy.cc(583)] Failed to call method:
> org.freedesktop.UPower.GetDisplayDevice: object_path=
> /org/freedesktop/UPower: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown:
> The name org.freedesktop.UPower was not provided by any .service files
> 
> Why should this be considered an error? I don't have upower installed.
> I don't want upower.
> 
> I understand this is not the kind of stuff most users care about.
> Just wondering whether somebody else is somewhat bothered by this.

Try uninstalling a a11y related software, disable the accessibility use
flag... at-spi2 launches its own dbus - it should go away if you
disable a11y features. Opera triggers starting these through dbus, and
they will try to bind to Gnome or KDE sessions.

I have these, too, in my systems because some packages unconditionally
pull in a11y features although I disabled all related useflags.

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am Mon, 14 Nov 2016 09:32:59 +0000

>> --config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf --nofork
>> --print-address 3
>>   417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd

>
> Try uninstalling a a11y related software, disable the accessibility use
> flag... at-spi2 launches its own dbus - it should go away if you
> disable a11y features. Opera triggers starting these through dbus, and
> they will try to bind to Gnome or KDE sessions.
>
> I have these, too, in my systems because some packages unconditionally
> pull in a11y features although I disabled all related useflags.
>
I don't know what a11y is... If you mean nls-related stuff, it is
already off, just like the accessibility USE flag. But
app-accessibility/at-spi2-atk is pulled by gtk+, unconditionally, so
there is nothing I can do about it, I guess. It is not ebuild fault
either, it's an upstream choice.
I also would love to get rid of dbus, but I suppose something
essential would break.

Thanks

Jorge

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Andrew Tselischev]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:32:59AM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> I noticed some obnoxious-looking processes in my system:
> 
> $ ps axf
> (...)
>   367 ?        S      0:00 dbus-launch --autolaunch
> 899f609d1c39e4d202c179a7580e4b49 --binary-syntax --close-stderr
>   368 ?        Ss     0:00 /usr/bin/dbus-daemon --fork --print-pid 5
> --print-address 7 --session
>   409 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/notification-daemon
>   411 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi-bus-launcher
>   415 ?        S      0:00  \_ /usr/bin/dbus-daemon
> --config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf --nofork
> --print-address 3
>   417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session
>   451 ?        S      0:00 /usr/libexec/gconfd-2
> 
> I don't use a DE, just plain openbox. I had a few xterms running and
> also Opera, no other graphical app. The above processes appeared after
> Opera was launched.
>  Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd --use-gnome-session"?
> 
> gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.
> 
> On a related note, the session logs have this gem:
> 
> ERROR:object_proxy.cc(583)] Failed to call method:
> org.freedesktop.UPower.GetDisplayDevice: object_path=
> /org/freedesktop/UPower: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown:
> The name org.freedesktop.UPower was not provided by any .service files
> 
> Why should this be considered an error? I don't have upower installed.
> I don't want upower.
> 
> I understand this is not the kind of stuff most users care about.
> Just wondering whether somebody else is somewhat bothered by this.
> 
> Jorge Almeida

I have the same problem. Recently I got so fed up with it I decided to try
my chances with chmod a-x /usr/libexec/at-spi* . So far, no problems.

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Mon, 14 Nov 2016 21:49:42 +0000
schrieb Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@gmail.com>:

> I don't know what a11y is...

accessibility
 +---------+  = 11 chars, a+11+y ;-)

It's like i18n, l10n... Developers love those it seems...

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Andrew Tselischev
<andrewts@farlander.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:32:59AM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> I noticed some obnoxious-looking processes in my system:
>>

>
> I have the same problem. Recently I got so fed up with it I decided to try
> my chances with chmod a-x /usr/libexec/at-spi* . So far, no problems.
>

Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
problem yet.

It would be great to have some WiKi pages telling what some USE flag
really do to particular packages, e.g, what does it mean to run
firefox without dbus.

Jorge

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Mon, 14 Nov 2016 23:38:44 +0000
schrieb Andrew Tselischev <andrewts@farlander.net>:

> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:32:59AM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> > I noticed some obnoxious-looking processes in my system:
> > 
> > $ ps axf
> > (...)
> >   367 ?        S      0:00 dbus-launch --autolaunch
> > 899f609d1c39e4d202c179a7580e4b49 --binary-syntax --close-stderr
> >   368 ?        Ss     0:00 /usr/bin/dbus-daemon --fork --print-pid 5
> > --print-address 7 --session
> >   409 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/notification-daemon
> >   411 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi-bus-launcher
> >   415 ?        S      0:00  \_ /usr/bin/dbus-daemon
> > --config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf
> > --nofork --print-address 3
> >   417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd
> > --use-gnome-session 451 ?        S      0:00 /usr/libexec/gconfd-2
> > 
> > I don't use a DE, just plain openbox. I had a few xterms running and
> > also Opera, no other graphical app. The above processes appeared
> > after Opera was launched.
> >  Why oh why should there be a process "at-spi2-registryd
> > --use-gnome-session"?
> > 
> > gnome-session?! I don't even have gnome installed.
> > 
> > On a related note, the session logs have this gem:
> > 
> > ERROR:object_proxy.cc(583)] Failed to call method:
> > org.freedesktop.UPower.GetDisplayDevice: object_path=
> > /org/freedesktop/UPower: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown:
> > The name org.freedesktop.UPower was not provided by any .service
> > files
> > 
> > Why should this be considered an error? I don't have upower
> > installed. I don't want upower.
> > 
> > I understand this is not the kind of stuff most users care about.
> > Just wondering whether somebody else is somewhat bothered by this.
> > 
> > Jorge Almeida  
> 
> I have the same problem. Recently I got so fed up with it I decided
> to try my chances with chmod a-x /usr/libexec/at-spi* . So far, no
> problems.

Or mask its autostarter, gets rid of error messages in the log:

sudo ln -snf /dev/null /etc/xdg/autostart/at-spi-dbus-bus.desktop

Then, on dispatch-conf, do not merge the config changes for this file.

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-14 23:52, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
> problem yet.

Do you _know_ a reason you need dbus, at all?

If you don't, you don't need it ;-)

Typically, a lot of GUI apps have dbus as a soft dependency for the sole
purpose of avoiding multiple instances.  So starting the app for the
second time just activates (in some general sense) the old window.

If this isn't important, you may be able to just uninstall it.

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 23:52, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>
>> Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
>> problem yet.
>
> Do you _know_ a reason you need dbus, at all?

No.

>
> If you don't, you don't need it ;-)

I would like to believe that.

>
> Typically, a lot of GUI apps have dbus as a soft dependency for the sole
> purpose of avoiding multiple instances.  So starting the app for the
> second time just activates (in some general sense) the old window.

Seems harmless enough. But how did they manage to convince nearly
everybody that dbus is the best invention next to sliced bread?

Jorge

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 15/11/2016 21:23, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-11-14 23:52, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>>
>>> Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
>>> problem yet.
>>
>> Do you _know_ a reason you need dbus, at all?
> 
> No.
> 
>>
>> If you don't, you don't need it ;-)
> 
> I would like to believe that.
> 
>>
>> Typically, a lot of GUI apps have dbus as a soft dependency for the sole
>> purpose of avoiding multiple instances.  So starting the app for the
>> second time just activates (in some general sense) the old window.
> 
> Seems harmless enough. But how did they manage to convince nearly
> everybody that dbus is the best invention next to sliced bread?


because dbus is actually a *good* thing for gui environments more than a
simple window manager?

Because ONE ipc mechanism - dbus - can replace a plethora of home-grown,
half-baked ipc methods that in total consume far more resources than dbus?

dbus is a message bus, that's all it is. Simple. light, easy, gets the
job done in environments where lots of bits have to chat to each other.



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15/11/2016 21:23, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
>>> On 2016-11-14 23:52, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
>>>> problem yet.
>>>
>>> Do you _know_ a reason you need dbus, at all?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>>
>>> If you don't, you don't need it ;-)
>>
>> I would like to believe that.
>>
>>>
>>> Typically, a lot of GUI apps have dbus as a soft dependency for the sole
>>> purpose of avoiding multiple instances.  So starting the app for the
>>> second time just activates (in some general sense) the old window.
>>
>> Seems harmless enough. But how did they manage to convince nearly
>> everybody that dbus is the best invention next to sliced bread?
>
>
> because dbus is actually a *good* thing for gui environments more than a
> simple window manager?
>
> Because ONE ipc mechanism - dbus - can replace a plethora of home-grown,
> half-baked ipc methods that in total consume far more resources than dbus?
>
> dbus is a message bus, that's all it is. Simple. light, easy, gets the
> job done in environments where lots of bits have to chat to each other.
>

Sure. Discussing details is beyond my league. Nevertheless, I  cannot
help thinking "vendor  locking".  Others may disagree about the
"simple" and "light" (http://skarnet.org/software/skabus/) but I'm not
qualified to decide...

Jorge Almeida

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Walter Dnes]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:52:50PM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote

> Good to know. I'm currently testing  openbox without dbus-launch. No
> problem yet.
> 
> It would be great to have some WiKi pages telling what some USE flag
> really do to particular packages, e.g, what does it mean to run
> firefox without dbus.

  The current Pale Moon requires glib-dbus.  I do my own custom builds
of Pale Moon for my personal use without dbus.  I also have an ancient
32-bit-only Atom netbook.  dbus is required for Necko-Wifi and Wakelock
in Pale Moon, and presumably also in Firefox...

Necko-Wifi - allows improved geo-location if you have wifi, which most
PCs have, even newer desktops.  It works by scanning SSIDs in your
vicinity and comparing against a master global database.  The local data
has to be sent off to a master database (e.g. Google) for the comparison.

Wakelock - is a generic API for grabbing a resource and not letting go
of it... https://www.w3.org/TR/wake-lock-use-cases/  It's mostly used
in mobile apps, but on the desktop it's used to disable the screensaver
while a long video is playing.

  If you can do without Necko-Wifi and Wakelock, you don't need dbus.
Let me know off-list if you need any help custom-building Pale Moon.
You can also join the Pale Moon web forum https://forum.palemoon.org/
The linux section is https://forum.palemoon.org/viewforum.php?f=37

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:52:50PM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote
>

>   The current Pale Moon requires glib-dbus.  I do my own custom builds
> of Pale Moon for my personal use without dbus.  I also have an ancient
> 32-bit-only Atom netbook.  dbus is required for Necko-Wifi and Wakelock
> in Pale Moon, and presumably also in Firefox...
>
> Necko-Wifi - allows improved geo-location if you have wifi, which most
> PCs have, even newer desktops.  It works by scanning SSIDs in your
> vicinity and comparing against a master global database.  The local data
> has to be sent off to a master database (e.g. Google) for the comparison.
>
> Wakelock - is a generic API for grabbing a resource and not letting go
> of it... https://www.w3.org/TR/wake-lock-use-cases/  It's mostly used
> in mobile apps, but on the desktop it's used to disable the screensaver
> while a long video is playing.
>

This is the kind of information that it would be useful to have in a
central place (WiKi), at least for USE variables that are bound to
have a global impact on the system.

>   If you can do without Necko-Wifi and Wakelock, you don't need dbus.
> Let me know off-list if you need any help custom-building Pale Moon.
> You can also join the Pale Moon web forum https://forum.palemoon.org/
> The linux section is https://forum.palemoon.org/viewforum.php?f=37
>
Thanks.
I tried Pale Moon once, but I think it had the same problem as Firefox
regarding cpu use, namely with youtube.

> --

> I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

+1

Cheers

Jorge

>

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1155 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:23:02 +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> > Wakelock - is a generic API for grabbing a resource and not letting go
> > of it... https://www.w3.org/TR/wake-lock-use-cases/  It's mostly used
> > in mobile apps, but on the desktop it's used to disable the
> > screensaver while a long video is playing.
> >  
> 
> This is the kind of information that it would be useful to have in a
> central place (WiKi), at least for USE variables that are bound to
> have a global impact on the system.

DBus is simply an IPC mechanism, the USE flag only enables the software
to talk to other software. What each piece of software does with that
ability is as varied as the software that uses it. Any such list would be
long, incomplete and almost certainly out of date and not relevant to the
USE flag anyway.

What you're asking is a bit like asking for a complete list of the
abilities the python USE flag adds, when all you can really say is it
allows the software to run Python scripts, not what those scripts may do.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Sleep is an excellent way of listening to an opera. - James Stephens
(1882-1950)

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 163 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:23:02 +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>
>>
> What you're asking is a bit like asking for a complete list of the
> abilities the python USE flag adds, when all you can really say is it
> allows the software to run Python scripts, not what those scripts may do.
>
>
I'm not really asking for exhaustive documentation about  USE flags,
just saying that even some fragmented documentation would be useful. I
don't expect a particular contributor to know  everything about a
particular USE flag. (And, of course, no one is under any obligation
to do it.)

All this would be easier if upstream package developers  would explain
what the different config options really entail. Most of the times,
"./configure --help" is not that helpful.

Jorge

[gentoo-user] sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Miroslav Rovis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2975 bytes --]

On 161114-21:49+0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Am Mon, 14 Nov 2016 09:32:59 +0000
> 
> >> --config-file=/usr/share/defaults/at-spi2/accessibility.conf --nofork
> >> --print-address 3
> >>   417 ?        Sl     0:00 /usr/libexec/at-spi2-registryd
> 
...
> I also would love to get rid of dbus, but I suppose something
> essential would break.
...
> Jorge
> 

I live without dbus. I've only recently noticed (can't be since long)
there is a dbus flag.

Find here also my very disliked pulseaudio and policykit flags:
https://www.gentoo.org/support/use-flags/

It's been my hard won struggle to rid me of dbus:
Uninstalling dbus and *kits (to Unfacilitate Remote Seats)
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-992146.html

I'm linking there because I was on the verge of giving up at one point,
and I don't know if you may need to look all the long and gory details,
as it wasn't completely easy to rid of dbus then... While it may be now.

I decided to go sans-dbus at all costs when I discovered a similar issue
like you report in the first main of this thread to which I now
participate:

[gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/message/4cd394faa9a3749bfc6bafbf6293ceba

Have a look:
Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=116770&start=45#p552566

pasting parts of what I found, for the lazy:
$ ps aux | grep ssh
root      2184  0.0  0.0  54976  1004 ?        Ss   Sep06   0:00
/usr/sbin/sshd
mr        2447  0.0  0.0  10592    32 ?        Ss   Sep06   0:00
/usr/bin/ssh-agent /usr/bin/dbus-launch --exit-with-session
x-session-manager
mr       15141  0.0  0.0  19980  1796 pts/9    S+   21:48   0:00 grep
ssh
$

It was the dbus-launch, it was an encrypted session in my own machine.
C'mon??!!

Also, I've noticed that our developers are lending an ear to sans-dbus
users, as they are getting way more packages then previosly that do not
depend in the least on dbus anymore (Firefox, Wireshark, Inkscape ...
well I don't use very many packages... Ah, not to forget, Qt5 now does
not depend on dbus, or D-Bus, used below...)

Ah, I almost forgot. Gentoo is as default (OpenRC) without dbus! Have a
look:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems

There is no D-Bus under "Main dependencies" for OpenRC (I really like
OpenRC...)

(
However, the search for newbies, not for someone who knows what (s)he
is searching, like me now, is not inclined, if others see what I see
when they search wiki, and pasting:
openrc init systems
in searchbox at:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Main_Page
didn't give me:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
How is that? I had noticed the same not-finding-it for Grsecurity long
time ago...
)

Regards!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Miroslav Rovis
<miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr> wrote:
> On 161114-21:49+0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> I live without dbus. I've only recently noticed (can't be since long)
> there is a dbus flag.
>

I knew Gentoo doesn't force the use of dbus, but I had the flag set,
since I expected assorted breakages. For example, when viewing a pdf
file, will updating the view when the file changes be possible without
dbus? This is the kind of trouble I expect. Not the fault of Gentoo,
anyway.

As for the *kit stuff, I just don't have it. It's safe to do without
that stuff, as far as I can tell.


>
> Also, I've noticed that our developers are lending an ear to sans-dbus
> users, as they are getting way more packages then previosly that do not
> depend in the least on dbus anymore (Firefox, Wireshark, Inkscape ...
> well I don't use very many packages... Ah, not to forget, Qt5 now does
> not depend on dbus, or D-Bus, used below...)
>
Yes. A couple of weeks ago, I needed alpine, which tried to pull PAM.
The current ebuild already has PAM  as an option, which is fine
(didn't emerge it yet, though). So, it seems some packages have hard
dependencies just because developers assumed "everybody uses it" or
"nobody will mind", not due to some dark agenda.

For my needs, Gentoo is the best distro out there. (Until recently, I
used Slackware, as well as Gentoo. Had to give up on Slackware 14.2,
with regret. Because pulseaudio,)

Regards,

Jorge

[gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Wed, 16 Nov 2016 11:25:02 +0000
schrieb Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:23:02 +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> >  
> >>  
> > What you're asking is a bit like asking for a complete list of the
> > abilities the python USE flag adds, when all you can really say is
> > it allows the software to run Python scripts, not what those
> > scripts may do.
> >
> >  
> I'm not really asking for exhaustive documentation about  USE flags,
> just saying that even some fragmented documentation would be useful. I
> don't expect a particular contributor to know  everything about a
> particular USE flag. (And, of course, no one is under any obligation
> to do it.)
> 
> All this would be easier if upstream package developers  would explain
> what the different config options really entail. Most of the times,
> "./configure --help" is not that helpful.

One could start a wiki entry for each use flag on the Gentoo wiki.

Also, you can use "euse -i USEFLAGNAME" which is sometimes helpful,
sometimes not - depending on how generic the description is.

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> All this would be easier if upstream package developers  would explain
>> what the different config options really entail. Most of the times,
>> "./configure --help" is not that helpful.
>
> One could start a wiki entry for each use flag on the Gentoo wiki.
>
A package maintainer would probably be qualified to say what a flag
means to that package, and they might add it to the flag page.

Sometimes, reading the ebuild helps (e.g., vim), sometimes it doesn't
(e.g., firefox).

> Also, you can use "euse -i USEFLAGNAME" which is sometimes helpful,
> sometimes not - depending on how generic the description is.
>
Yes, this may help a bit too.

Regards,

Jorge

Re: [gentoo-user] sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I knew Gentoo doesn't force the use of dbus, but I had the flag set,
> since I expected assorted breakages. For example, when viewing a pdf
> file, will updating the view when the file changes be possible without
> dbus? This is the kind of trouble I expect. Not the fault of Gentoo,
> anyway.
>
> As for the *kit stuff, I just don't have it. It's safe to do without
> that stuff, as far as I can tell.
> ...
> For my needs, Gentoo is the best distro out there. (Until recently, I
> used Slackware, as well as Gentoo. Had to give up on Slackware 14.2,
> with regret. Because pulseaudio,)
>

To each his own, and I'm glad Gentoo supports running without any of
this stuff, but on a semi-typical system I'd suggest that you're
probably better off having this stuff installed than otherwise.

I'd been running without pulseaudio for ages, but finally got around
to installing it because I was having audio issues when running
multiple X11 sessions.  With pulse it just works, and installing pulse
was pretty trivial.  Sure, it is overkill in the most basic
configurations, but as soon as you start getting multiple audio
devices/users/etc all going at the same time the purpose for the
complexity becomes more apparent.

As far as dbus/policykit goes, it really is just an IPC
implementation, because IPC on Linux isn't all that great
out-of-the-box.  It was shot down for the kernel, but a revamped
solution is probably likely to take its place there, and then
everybody will just use the kernel version (and you'll see dbus
disappear in your process list).  Sure, it is more complex than
sending SIGUSR1 to a process (while trying to remember which of
less-dedicated signals do what for what daemon), but it is a lot more
capable.  Policykit also lets you do stuff like saying this user is
allowed to restart this service, but not do anything else, and so on,
using a configuration which is flexible and works across different
applications/etc.

Again, you can sort-of live without this stuff, and there is nothing
wrong if you want to do that, but this stuff was written for a reason.
At the very least I'd suggest understanding it all in case it actually
might solve a problem for you.

-- 
Rich

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-16 20:48, Rich Freeman wrote:

> Policykit also lets you do stuff like saying this user is allowed to
> restart this service, but not do anything else, and so on, using a
> configuration which is flexible and works across different
> applications/etc.

I'm curious what you mean by "service" here.  Surely not the things
managed by rc-service, only root can touch them, right?  Or regular
users via sudo, and then sudo config restricts what they can do.

I'm _guessing_ you mean desktop services like gnome-settings, and my
retort is, I don't have any of those, and I never will.

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Rich Freeman]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
> On 2016-11-16 20:48, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> Policykit also lets you do stuff like saying this user is allowed to
>> restart this service, but not do anything else, and so on, using a
>> configuration which is flexible and works across different
>> applications/etc.
>
> I'm curious what you mean by "service" here.  Surely not the things
> managed by rc-service, only root can touch them, right?  Or regular
> users via sudo, and then sudo config restricts what they can do.
>
> I'm _guessing_ you mean desktop services like gnome-settings, and my
> retort is, I don't have any of those, and I never will.
>

No, I mean services as in stuff like apache, gnome, and so on.
However, this was probably not a great example as it looks like none
of the service managers actually support policykit for this right now,
which means that only root can use these dbus commands.

A better example might be doing things like changing the hostname,
without being root, or start/stop a container/vm.

Sure, you can also do some of this using sudo, but sudo isn't actually
a great tool for this as it is oriented around command line syntax,
and not functional privileges.  The whole point of something like
dbus/policykit is that you define what you want somebody to be able to
do, not what commands they can type in order to try to do it.

dbus support for these sorts of administrative functions is still
somewhat limited, and I suspect it will remain so until it is
completely merged into the kernel (or rather, bus1 is).  It is also
somewhat new for these sorts of things.  Previously it was more
focused on desktop-like functionality, such as loading icc color
profiles (apparently one of things you never will need).

Ultimately though the concept is a pretty sound one.  There are lots
of things done in userspace where you'd want the same kind of
granularity that posix capabilities offer in kernel space, and
policykit is a way to eventually manage these.  UID=0 vs UID!=0 was
once nice upon a time, but it isn't great for security, and the
previous ways of addressing that tended to be lacking in various ways.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Frank Steinmetzger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 788 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:23:02AM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> Thanks.
> I tried Pale Moon once, but I think it had the same problem as Firefox
> regarding cpu use, namely with youtube.

That’s one reason why I had never used video sites in the past and now as
soon as I found out about youtube-dl. Unlike its name suggests, it supports
dozens of video sites.
Not only allows me that to play the video using my favourite video player,
but also to play at higher speeds -- all of that at minimal system load.
(Not to mention being able to achive videos I’d like to keep).
-- 
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

You should borrow money only from pessimists,
because they don’t expect it back.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Frank Steinmetzger <Warp_7@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:23:02AM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>

>> I tried Pale Moon once, but I think it had the same problem as Firefox
>> regarding cpu use, namely with youtube.
>
> That’s one reason why I had never used video sites in the past and now as
> soon as I found out about youtube-dl. Unlike its name suggests, it supports
> dozens of video sites.
> Not only allows me that to play the video using my favourite video player,
> but also to play at higher speeds -- all of that at minimal system load.
> (Not to mention being able to achive videos I’d like to keep).
> --
Good hint. Still, some of the suggestions from youtube are useful, and
I suppose I would loose that.

Regards

Jorge

Re: [gentoo-user] gnome intrusion?

[Frank Steinmetzger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 08:49:57PM +0000, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> >> I tried Pale Moon once, but I think it had the same problem as Firefox
> >> regarding cpu use, namely with youtube.
> >
> > That’s one reason why I had never used video sites in the past and now as
> > soon as I found out about youtube-dl. Unlike its name suggests, it supports
> > dozens of video sites.
> > Not only allows me that to play the video using my favourite video player,
> > but also to play at higher speeds -- all of that at minimal system load.
> > (Not to mention being able to achive videos I’d like to keep).

> Good hint. Still, some of the suggestions from youtube are useful, and
> I suppose I would loose that.

I typed a little quickly and distractedly. I do still »use« the video
sites. Just I never use their player. ^^
It’s become automatic:
- press y in Firefox (vim addon’s hotkey to copy current URL)
- switch to terminal, press ",y " and insert url (",y" being my bash alias
  for youtube-dl)
- wait a moment or open a second terminal and watch the video while it’s
  still being downloaded. Try that, Windows. :D


Hm.. maybe I should try Palemoon, too. I’m keeping Firefox on version
49 because my beloved vim addon is not signed. I can’t live^wbrowse without
it.
-- 
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

Tea?  No, thanks. I am an atheist.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Thu, 17 Nov 2016 04:08:31 -0500
schrieb Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>:

> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net>
> wrote:
> > On 2016-11-16 20:48, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >  
> >> Policykit also lets you do stuff like saying this user is allowed
> >> to restart this service, but not do anything else, and so on,
> >> using a configuration which is flexible and works across different
> >> applications/etc.  
> >
> > I'm curious what you mean by "service" here.  Surely not the things
> > managed by rc-service, only root can touch them, right?  Or regular
> > users via sudo, and then sudo config restricts what they can do.
> >
> > I'm _guessing_ you mean desktop services like gnome-settings, and my
> > retort is, I don't have any of those, and I never will.
> >  
> 
> No, I mean services as in stuff like apache, gnome, and so on.
> However, this was probably not a great example as it looks like none
> of the service managers actually support policykit for this right now,
> which means that only root can use these dbus commands.

I think systemd supports it, tho I don't know how granular that can be
made. Ideally, on a systemd machine, also desktop services are managed
by a user instance of systemd. In this case, the user is already able
to manage all these services. But most DEs still bring their own
service manager (like kded in KDE I think), managed through dbus with
an incompatible interface to systemd. The only systemd-native services
in my DE is currently pulseaudio, invaded by a few service brought by
Gnome components, including the aforementioned at-spi-dbus-bus.service
which I masked. Of course, dbus is part of this systemd user instance.

I've just taken another look at "systemctl --user status" and it looks
like more and more KDE services are also started from systemd now
through dbus activation. I wonder which components I could remove
from /etc/xdg/autostart so these are only started on demand through
dbus activation.

In the end, systemd /can/ make your system slimmer by starting services
(user and system) only on demand through dbus activation (or socket
activation).

> A better example might be doing things like changing the hostname,
> without being root, or start/stop a container/vm.

That's possible with policy-kit, tho I still think configuration
through XML is overly complex. A much simpler format could do, plus
make it actually human-readable.

> Sure, you can also do some of this using sudo, but sudo isn't actually
> a great tool for this as it is oriented around command line syntax,
> and not functional privileges.  The whole point of something like
> dbus/policykit is that you define what you want somebody to be able to
> do, not what commands they can type in order to try to do it.

Using sudoers configuration is a huge security pita if you don't
exactly know what you do configure. Plus, it is quite cumbersome when
it comes to only parsing command lines for decision. Especially on a
server, I do not really feel comfortable with that.

> dbus support for these sorts of administrative functions is still
> somewhat limited, and I suspect it will remain so until it is
> completely merged into the kernel (or rather, bus1 is).

I think it's rather missing some good frontend utilities (GUI and CLI).
Especially combined with policy-kit.

> It is also
> somewhat new for these sorts of things.  Previously it was more
> focused on desktop-like functionality, such as loading icc color
> profiles (apparently one of things you never will need).

Well, I think the "d" actually comes from "desktop". But with systemd
deployments, it also provides function for servers and their
management. I think, a lot can still be explored here. It's actually
useful. Tho, I'd also prefer a native kernel implementation with dbus
only sitting on top of it as a compatibility layer until all DEs
adapted it.

> Ultimately though the concept is a pretty sound one.  There are lots
> of things done in userspace where you'd want the same kind of
> granularity that posix capabilities offer in kernel space, and
> policykit is a way to eventually manage these.  UID=0 vs UID!=0 was
> once nice upon a time, but it isn't great for security, and the
> previous ways of addressing that tended to be lacking in various ways.

Well, let's wait for the argument "but this is not the unix way". ;-)


-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-19 10:21, Kai Krakow wrote:

> Well, let's wait for the argument "but this is not the unix way". ;-)

No, that is not my argument.

My argument is: I want _control_.  As in the GNU Manifesto.  And that
means no huge subsystems dipping their claws into everything, and
starting obscure daemons behind my back.

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
> On 2016-11-19 10:21, Kai Krakow wrote:
>
>> Well, let's wait for the argument "but this is not the unix way". ;-)
>
> No, that is not my argument.
>
> My argument is: I want _control_.  As in the GNU Manifesto.  And that
> means no huge subsystems dipping their claws into everything, and
> starting obscure daemons behind my back.
>

Presumably if you sent a dbus message to your service manager asking
it to start a daemon that doesn't count as being behind your back.

If you're talking about something starting at boot time, I've yet to
hear of a service manager that doesn't let you tell it what services
you want, or one that doesn't come with some set of defaults.  As I
recall sysvinit went spawning gettys on first boot and I don't recall
having to tell it to do that, fortunately.  :)

-- 
Rich

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-19 14:16, Rich Freeman wrote:

> Presumably if you sent a dbus message to your service manager asking
> it to start a daemon that doesn't count as being behind your back.

I did not - some program which I never heard of but is part of the DE du
jour did, without any explicit configuration to do so.  Typically when
loading some library which I never heard of, also part of said DE, for
the first time.

I hope you agree this is very different from daemons started by init
(whatever flavor).

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 19/11/2016 22:47, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2016-11-19 14:16, Rich Freeman wrote:
> 
>> Presumably if you sent a dbus message to your service manager asking
>> it to start a daemon that doesn't count as being behind your back.
> 
> I did not - some program which I never heard of but is part of the DE du
> jour did, without any explicit configuration to do so.  Typically when
> loading some library which I never heard of, also part of said DE, for
> the first time.
> 
> I hope you agree this is very different from daemons started by init
> (whatever flavor).
> 


I do not agree.

The big two DE's start dbus because the developers write code that needs
it. There is no explicit config to start it in the form of "dbus=yes" in
kde.conf because it is required.

init starts a whole bunch of stuff. It's all terribly mysterious until
you read the relevant docs, at which point it ceases to be so mysterious
and becomes knowledge.

Same with everything KDE, Gnome et al do that you are complaining about.
It's only worth complaining about being mysterious because you have not
yet studied them and understand them.

Yes I know init and KDE are very very different beasts from different
eras with different approaches to getting stuff done and so can appear
completely different. But within the contact of /this/ thread, they are
very similar. And you don't understand one of them to anything like the
same standard you understand the other.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2016-11-19 23:07, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> Yes I know init and KDE are very very different beasts from different
> eras with different approaches to getting stuff done and so can appear
> completely different. But within the contact of /this/ thread, they are
> very similar. And you don't understand one of them to anything like the
> same standard you understand the other.

I agree with this, this is the core of the issue.

But you see: I don't need the features these new beasts provide.  Why
should I have to learn all that huge amount of information, crowding out
things I actually _like_ to know from my declining memory, to keep control
of my computing?

-- 
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign
Don't clear-text sign: http://cr.yp.to/smtp/8bitmime.html

Re: [gentoo-user] sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Tom H]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Miroslav Rovis
<miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr> wrote:
>
> Ah, I almost forgot. Gentoo is as default (OpenRC) without dbus! Have a
> look:
>
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
>
> There is no D-Bus under "Main dependencies" for OpenRC (I really like
> OpenRC...)

There's no reason that the fact that OpenRC doesn't depend on dbus
should imply that something higher up the stack cannot depend on dbus!

Re: [gentoo-user] sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Miroslav Rovis
> <miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr> wrote:
>>
>> Ah, I almost forgot. Gentoo is as default (OpenRC) without dbus! Have a
>> look:
>>
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
>>
>> There is no D-Bus under "Main dependencies" for OpenRC (I really like
>> OpenRC...)
>
> There's no reason that the fact that OpenRC doesn't depend on dbus
> should imply that something higher up the stack cannot depend on dbus!
>

I'd also comment that utilizing dbus and spawning random processes
that you don't understand are orthogonal issues.  Dbus is just an IPC
mechanism.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2551 bytes --]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@primate.net> wrote:
[ ... ]
> Why
> should I have to learn all that huge amount of information, crowding out
> things I actually _like_ to know from my declining memory, to keep control
> of my computing?

Because you didn't wrote the code. Someone else did, and you are using it
free (as in beer and as in freedom). Therefore, you don't get a say on what
dependencies the code should or shouldn't rely on.

You don't like a dependency? Use other software that doesn't use it; be
warned that it will almost for sure be less capable that the one that uses
dbus.

You don't want to stop using the software, but you don't want the
dependency? Then write patches for the software that allow the dependency
to be dropped; be warned that said patches will most probably be rejected,
since the maintainers have to think in the *generality* of its users, not
in your particular case, and therefore the dependency (dbus in this case)
makes perfect sense and make their lifes *sooooo* much easier.

You still insist on not using the dependency? Then fork the code and
maintain it yourself. You will quickly see why the maintainers decided to
use dbus.

The real solution is, as Alan said, understanding the reason of the
dependency and reaching the completely logical conclusion that the
maintainers were 100% right on deciding to depend on dbus, because it's the
bee's knees.

You are right: it's your computer and you have the right to decide what
does it runs and what it doesn't (that's why you run a Free Software BIOS
and no proprietary firmware at all, right?) But you don't get to complain
about the choices that other software's authors take about dependencies and
requirements for said software: if you don't like it, stop using it or
contribute to changing it (with the very real possibility that your
contributions will be rejected).

You don't *have to* learn a huge amount of information about dbus; but it
will help you to understand why so many in this thread see the dbus
dependency as perfectly reasonable.

Or don't learn nothing about dbus, but then stop complaining about why some
software uses it, and be happy to enjoy its many many advantages. And the
fact that is Free Software, and you can study and learn from the code if
you so desire at some point in the future.

Regards.
--
Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de Carrera Asociado C
Departamento de Matemáticas
Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2811 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 19/11/2016 23:23, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2016-11-19 23:07, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> Yes I know init and KDE are very very different beasts from different
>> eras with different approaches to getting stuff done and so can appear
>> completely different. But within the contact of /this/ thread, they are
>> very similar. And you don't understand one of them to anything like the
>> same standard you understand the other.
>
> I agree with this, this is the core of the issue.
>
> But you see: I don't need the features these new beasts provide.  Why
> should I have to learn all that huge amount of information, crowding out
> things I actually _like_ to know from my declining memory, to keep control
> of my computing?
>

Computing is a never-ending cycle of new stuff to learn. Deal with it.

Devs are not going to stop exploring new technologies and methods just 
because Ian Zimmerman is getting old.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Walter Dnes]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 01:23:13PM -0800, Ian Zimmerman wrote
> On 2016-11-19 23:07, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> 
> > Yes I know init and KDE are very very different beasts from different
> > eras with different approaches to getting stuff done and so can appear
> > completely different. But within the contact of /this/ thread, they are
> > very similar. And you don't understand one of them to anything like the
> > same standard you understand the other.
> 
> I agree with this, this is the core of the issue.
> 
> But you see: I don't need the features these new beasts provide.  Why
> should I have to learn all that huge amount of information, crowding out
> things I actually _like_ to know from my declining memory, to keep control
> of my computing?

  I use ICEWM.  See my sig.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

[gentoo-user] Re: sans-dbus was: gnome intrusion?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Sat, 19 Nov 2016 17:15:27 -0500
schrieb Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>:

> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Miroslav Rovis
> > <miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr> wrote:  
> >>
> >> Ah, I almost forgot. Gentoo is as default (OpenRC) without dbus!
> >> Have a look:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
> >>
> >> There is no D-Bus under "Main dependencies" for OpenRC (I really
> >> like OpenRC...)  
> >
> > There's no reason that the fact that OpenRC doesn't depend on dbus
> > should imply that something higher up the stack cannot depend on
> > dbus! 
> 
> I'd also comment that utilizing dbus and spawning random processes
> that you don't understand are orthogonal issues.  Dbus is just an IPC
> mechanism.

It's actually not dbus' fault that at-spi2 is launched... It's just a
side-effect of at-spi2 being an IPC built ontop of dbus.

What I don't like is that at-spi2 launches it's own dbus instance. Why
not just join the bus that's already there?

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.