On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Cody Maloney <cmaloney@theoreticalchaos.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 6:22 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
... so, anyone out there to support or refute this observation (with actual experience ...)
Better is a matter of opinion. From what I've gathered about systemd it makes a lot of things a lot better/simpler/cleaner, and seems to be fairly sensibly put together.
don't forget things that were previously not possible! like verifiable boot, reliable kill/term/reload (WITHOUT cooperation from the child process), and resource limiting for example... all of which are rather important for servers :-)
Systemd definitely gets a lot right, and I do use it some on my desktops which already have a strong dependency on D-Bus.
arch desktops? could you elaborate more here; how is the experience?
I could see possibly trying to build a non-bash/sysv init system for Arch to provide much of what systemd provides
i don't understand what you mean here... reinvent an application that currently gaining much traction/backing? why?
but I don't like bringing in D-Bus as a core system dependency to do so. I like KISS, and D-Bus (at least in its current state), just doesn't fit into my interpretation of KISS on any machine.
i just did a quick check on dbus-core. minus all the man pages, headers, etc. you are left with a single dynamic library, and 5 binaries. these combined weigh in at a whopping half a MB (yes, that's 0.5MB :-). what's not kiss about that? i guess i think dbus is pretty awesome. quite frankly, i love linux but i'm tired of editing 1000s of different kinds of config files with different syntax, and disparate methods for doing every little thing. it's a high speed bus that lets me use language <insert here> to speak to many different running applications, independent of the application's language, reliably and effectively. things like libvirt/policykit are very important to my personal/professional uses of linux, at home and company. i don't see dbus going away anytime soon, and honestly i hope it becomes integrated into everything and becomes integral to the linux experience, because from a development point of view it adds a lot of flexibility to grow and introspect, with little if any drawbacks (though i could very well be missing something).
D-Bus has directly reduced both the predictability and stability of my machines, ... for the time being, it has caused me nothing but problems.
how so? if you mean applications changing their interface, this really isn't dbus's fault. could you elaborate more? i have many systems and custom scripts that rely on it in one way or another and i haven't experienced any issues. thanks for your response; it's well appreciated. C Anthony