2014/12/13 1:29 <berenger.mo...@neutralite.org>: > > Le 12.12.2014 16:46, Joel Rees a écrit : >> >> I did say it was not the dbus you download from freedesktop.org [5], >> didn't I? ;-/ > > > Indeed. > > >> My understanding is that it is not just a port. Re-written from >> scratch, I think. Stuff that just tries to be a lazy man's sockets >> largely left out, I think. > > > I would be more interested to take a look at the alternative's code, than than to the original's. The few tools'code I've seen of same tool but implemented by the net/open/freeBSD and versions I could find in linux, had a huge difference in terms of code clarity. > > >> I would not say that you were exactly wrong. Portability is not just >> a matter of getting things to compile, and there are some features of >> dbus that one would just as soon leave out when re-implementing it. > > > Well, maybe dbus itself is not portable, nor clean (I said maybe. Code cleanness is a matter of opinion, and I only have read 2 source files just now) but if there is another implementation around, then at least what it provides can be provided in other systems, eventually in a cleaner way. > > Just curious, what's the name of this alternative? I would like to see if it could replace the original, or why not taking a quick look at it's source code. Just to build my own opinion. >
openbsd's website allows you to browse their source. Their dbus would be in their ports (packages) tree, I think. Try looking at dbus* under here: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/x11/ -- Joel Rees
