This is a valid observation, although as everything that has to do with
architecture, hard to prove.
(Don't use the P-word, that's reserved for Plato and Nietzsche.)
I also have the impression that the trend set by the original Unix
architecture (small, one-job components, generic interfaces)
is nowadays replaced in many areas with integrated solutions
("frameworks") that provide non-separable components
and sometimes redundant interfaces.
For systemd, according to Wikipedia, it provides:
- socket *and* d-bus interfaces
- a cron-like scheduler
- a logging facility, but also access to syslogd
- udev, which was pretty complex itself (frustrating for me: useless
for my setup, had to learn it without having any curiosity/interest)
- etc.
WHY?
The trend can also be seen in other areas. Take Spring for Java:
gathers together components that were implemented
separately long time ago. Or even the iOS aps: there is no meaningful
IPC there.
One reason why I try to take what I can from Plan9 is that I profoundly
mistrust systems that I cannot understand due to their size/bloat.
Arnold, thanks for the food for the mind :-).
Cheers,
Dante
On 13.08.2014 06:53, Aharon Robbins wrote:
http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1408.1/02496.html
Someone should turn this guy on to Plan 9. :-)
Arnold
