On Wed, 18.05.11 14:46, Federico Mena Quintero ([email protected]) wrote:
> There are *probably* hit-and-run services like "set the hostname" where > D-Bus activation could launch a tiny helper process that changes the > hostname and emits a signal, and dies quickly. These present no > problem, except for how to ship them. hostnamed is a tiny bus activated service. It normally isn't running unless somebody is using it, i.e. is actually changing the hostname. > There are *probably* services that need to be running constantly, but I > can't think of one right now. Those need a daemon. I'm kind of unhappy > of the proliferation of daemons that we had at one point - > gnome-session, the user's D-Bus daemon, gnome-settings-daemon, etc. > Maybe if we had One Standard Way of loading service-y things into a > central daemon, we could save a little memory and context switches? Is > this even worthwhile? (If one crashes, it would make things much > worse...). I think the best way to save resources is not to run anything. For stuff like hostnames/locale/time which is used only every other moonphase having tiny single-purpose mini-services is perfectly appropriate. I don't think there would be any benefit in merging these mini daemons into one. Au contraire, I'd guess you'd waste even more resources with dlopen() and friends. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
