On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:53:53PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > Sure, I can write one binary to rule them all, pull out all the code from all > tools I need, but for me an IPC mechanism sounds a lot better. And it should > be > _one_ common IPC mechanism and not a plethora of them. It should feel like an > operating system and not like a bunch of thrown together software, which is > glued together with some magic shell scripts.
And so requiring wireshark (and X?) in initramfs to debug problems once dbus is introduced is better? I would think shell scripts are *easier* to debug when things go wrong, especially in a minimal environment such as an initial ram disk. Having had to debug problems in a distro initramfs when trying to help a customer bring up a FC boot disk long ago in another life, I'm certain I would rather debug problems while on site at a classified machine room[1] using shell scripts, and trying to debug dbus is something that would be infinitely worse. - Ted [1] So no laptop, no google, no access to sources to figure out random dbus messages, etc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/