[arch-dev-public] [RFC] preparing dbus for coexistence with kdbus
Hi guys, Work on kdbus is nearing completion (of a first version at least) and it will soon be submitted upstream. We will also soon have a 'bridge' in systemd between the old libdbus and kdbus. This bridge will conflict with the old dbus daemon, but libdbus will still be around for a long time. All of this stuff is very much still under development, and the details are not clear yet. However, to make it simpler for Arch users to help out with the testing and development of kdbus and its systemd counterpart, I'd like to propose the following: * split 'dbus' into 'dbus' and 'libdbus' * make dbus depend on libdbus * other packages will still depend on dbus, rather than libdbus directly. For the regular users, this should have no effect, but for people building and testing systemd/kdbus it means they can still stick with our stock libdbus rather than building their own. At some point in the future, I expect this will be beneficial to all, as we will likely drop the dbus and just keep libdbus around. Thoughts? Cheers, Tom
On 12/01/2013 03:05 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
Hi guys,
Work on kdbus is nearing completion (of a first version at least) and it will soon be submitted upstream. We will also soon have a 'bridge' in systemd between the old libdbus and kdbus. This bridge will conflict with the old dbus daemon, but libdbus will still be around for a long time.
All of this stuff is very much still under development, and the details are not clear yet. However, to make it simpler for Arch users to help out with the testing and development of kdbus and its systemd counterpart, I'd like to propose the following:
* split 'dbus' into 'dbus' and 'libdbus' * make dbus depend on libdbus * other packages will still depend on dbus, rather than libdbus directly.
For the regular users, this should have no effect, but for people building and testing systemd/kdbus it means they can still stick with our stock libdbus rather than building their own. At some point in the future, I expect this will be beneficial to all, as we will likely drop the dbus and just keep libdbus around.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
Hola! Nice. I read that kdbus is only enabled in tarball build if you want, (so the support is optional at least for now) Maybe I am wrong, just guessing, but since our LTS kernel will not include kdbus, this implies that we have two systemd packages, one for standard kernel and other for lts kernel? Good luck! -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi \cos^2\alpha + \sin^2\alpha = 1
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
On 12/01/2013 03:05 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
Hi guys,
Work on kdbus is nearing completion (of a first version at least) and it will soon be submitted upstream. We will also soon have a 'bridge' in systemd between the old libdbus and kdbus. This bridge will conflict with the old dbus daemon, but libdbus will still be around for a long time.
All of this stuff is very much still under development, and the details are not clear yet. However, to make it simpler for Arch users to help out with the testing and development of kdbus and its systemd counterpart, I'd like to propose the following:
* split 'dbus' into 'dbus' and 'libdbus' * make dbus depend on libdbus * other packages will still depend on dbus, rather than libdbus directly.
For the regular users, this should have no effect, but for people building and testing systemd/kdbus it means they can still stick with our stock libdbus rather than building their own. At some point in the future, I expect this will be beneficial to all, as we will likely drop the dbus and just keep libdbus around.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
Hola!
Nice. I read that kdbus is only enabled in tarball build if you want, (so the support is optional at least for now)
Maybe I am wrong, just guessing, but since our LTS kernel will not include kdbus, this implies that we have two systemd packages, one for standard kernel and other for lts kernel?
It will still be a long time before this is enabled in a released version, and probably longer still before it will be required. I expect that when the time comes both our LTS and standard kernels will have kdbus support (it is just a module, backporting should be easy). Cheers, Tom
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Tom Gundersen
Work on kdbus is nearing completion (of a first version at least) and it will soon be submitted upstream. We will also soon have a 'bridge' in systemd between the old libdbus and kdbus. This bridge will conflict with the old dbus daemon, but libdbus will still be around for a long time.
All of this stuff is very much still under development, and the details are not clear yet. However, to make it simpler for Arch users to help out with the testing and development of kdbus and its systemd counterpart, I'd like to propose the following:
* split 'dbus' into 'dbus' and 'libdbus' * make dbus depend on libdbus * other packages will still depend on dbus, rather than libdbus directly.
For the regular users, this should have no effect, but for people building and testing systemd/kdbus it means they can still stick with our stock libdbus rather than building their own. At some point in the future, I expect this will be beneficial to all, as we will likely drop the dbus and just keep libdbus around.
Thoughts?
Done. -t
participants (2)
-
Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
-
Tom Gundersen