| |||||||||||||
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernelKroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernelPosted Feb 9, 2013 13:46 UTC (Sat) by drago01 (subscriber, #50715)In reply to: Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel by oldtomas Parent article: Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel
The problem is that this "hate" is based on irrational and/or nonsensical arguments.
(Log in to post comments)
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 9, 2013 18:37 UTC (Sat) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
Actually, I believe it's based on the argument that it's non-unixy!
DISPLAY=192.168.2.5:0 dbus-launch kate
will, I understand, crash and burn pretty spectacularly. I dunno, I haven't really played with it.
Plus the fact that dbus was born as part of Gnome ... I gather the KDE equivalent was network-aware and didn't not work on a network.
Hence my comment elsewhere about wanting stuff to work over the network ...
Cheers,
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 10, 2013 3:39 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]
As said elsewhere, loads of IPC methods that are part of UNIX standards don't work across the network. This just reiterates that there are no arguments.
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 10, 2013 8:25 UTC (Sun) by krake (subscriber, #55996) [Link]
KDE's DCOP, the D-Bus predecessor, worked over network due to using some X11 client-to-client communication mechanism.
Of course this isn't an option for something that also needs to be able to provide the equivalent to the D-Bus system bus.
D-Bus, however, could make use of other techniques, e.g. certificate based authentication over TCP, etc. but on the other hand that would limit the feature set available to clients which wanted to support that (might be OK for the majority of clients though).
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 10, 2013 19:36 UTC (Sun) by hp (subscriber, #5220) [Link]
there is no conceptual problem tunneling dbus over X or adding a secure TCP auth mechanism. it already works if you have a network home dir in common (because the "cookie in homedir" auth then works).
it's just a matter of someone caring enough to do the work. in around a decade not a single person has wanted this enough to code it or pay to code it. That's why it didn't get coded.
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 10, 2013 16:20 UTC (Sun) by oldtomas (guest, #72579) [Link]
> The problem is that this "hate" is based on irrational and/or nonsensical arguments.
Of course your arguments are thoroughly rational and those disagreeing just Haven' Seen The Light (TM).
It's that kind of argument what makes me sad (it's on both sides of the rift, mind you).
It's about time that both sides accept that the other side might have perfectly valid arguments (which I (for any value of "I") jut don't get or which don't apply to me).
As a corollary, extreme positions ("X should be the default/only option everywhere" vs. "X should die already", for any value of "X", e.g. D-BUS, Systemd whatever) won't make anything better.
And your position "You disagree with me: that must be irrational" doesn't help (neither the opponents nor the proponents).
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 10, 2013 23:39 UTC (Sun) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
I think you are promoting a false equivilancy. On one side there are people working on making a practical, pragmatic IPC system for rational, documented reasons and on the other a small minority who mostly engage in debate using emotional terms without explaining any position other than how much they hate the new thing. You see the same thing, often from the same people, in discussions about systemd, udev, pulse audio, wayland and d-bus. The few who are articulate enough to communicate a reason should be applauded, the few who actually listen rather than monologue, and show the ability to change their mind, or at least respect others, should be applauded greatly.
Kroah-Hartman: AF_BUS, D-Bus, and the Linux kernel Posted Feb 11, 2013 13:21 UTC (Mon) by drago01 (subscriber, #50715) [Link]
Yeah exactly.
|
|||||||||||||