On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: > 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
The forums seems to be down at the moment so I'll try to read the thread later. The only thing I wanted to say what that for me it's been somewhat backward. hald doesn't work for my video cards because my hardware isn't well supported. However I still have it turned on. I cannot suggest why it's on, but it is. I presume it helps with mounting external drives and things but I cannot or have not proved it. On the other hand there's a _long_ history in the pro-audio area of seeing problems with dbus messing up the operation of Jack audio and many of us including me leave dbus turned off. Go figure! - Mark
