Re: [Dng] idea for discussion: why 1 dbus [long e-mail]

2015-02-26 Thread Steve Litt of Troubleshooters.Com
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:02:42 +0100 Godefridus Daalmans wrote: > Well, I have an idea for a discussion about "re-architecting" Linux, > however it is very likely that this is just my lack of understanding > speaking: > > I am aware that task #1 is providing Devuan Jessie (without systemd), > a

Re: [Dng] idea for discussion: why 1 dbus [long e-mail]

2015-02-25 Thread Jude Nelson
I personally think dbus is largely a wheel re-invented--not necessarily due to incompetence on its developers' parts, mind you, but more due to mission and scope creep over the past 12 years. If inter-process communication could be done all over again from scratch, knowing what we use dbus for the

Re: [Dng] idea for discussion: why 1 dbus [long e-mail]

2015-02-25 Thread Nate Bargmann
* On 2015 25 Feb 10:03 -0600, Godefridus Daalmans wrote: > Personally I consider task #2 to do a little discovery and documenting of > what kinds of "middle-ware" I have on my Linux box and how it all interacts > (things like: what is akonadi/nepomuk/colord/avahi and do I need all of > that). Unle

[Dng] idea for discussion: why 1 dbus [long e-mail]

2015-02-25 Thread Godefridus Daalmans
Well, I have an idea for a discussion about "re-architecting" Linux, however it is very likely that this is just my lack of understanding speaking: I am aware that task #1 is providing Devuan Jessie (without systemd), and that is already enough work. Personally I consider task #2 to do a lit