On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:43:12 +0100, Zeerak Waseem wrote: > > That's as much crippling as simplifying. You can do without pam and > > hal by setting appropriate USE flags (I run pam-free here by > > doing just that) but D-Bus provides a standard way for applications to > > communicate with one another and removing it can stop your desktop > > working as it should.
> Really? I removed dbus from my system altogether and everything seems > to be communicating fine. And according to this > (http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-810848-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-0.html) > > a system should be able to communicate without dbus. I've not read the whole thread, but this quote jumped out. "DBUS is just the chosen successor to DCOP and CORBA; all platforms have inter-process messaging (e.g, Distributed Objects in OSX/*STEP)." It is a messaging layer and nothing to do with HAL, although HAL may use it to communicate, for example to let the desktop know that a USB device has been connected or disconnected. While HAL is an ugly mess that should never be exposed to users, D-Bus just gets on with its job, maybe because it is not exposed to users. -- Neil Bothwick "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
