On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 04:02:34PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Michele Curti <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Just out of curiosity, would you like to change something in dbus design, > > if you didn't have to worry about ABI breaks and the like? > > > > Good question. I can't remember any big-picture things, I'm sure the > current maintainers and users have a longer list. :-) There are a > variety of little small things, some examples I can immediately think > of: > > * the ad hoc authentication protocol is sort of ugly > * the byte order marker in every message is silly > * protocol version in every message is useless > * Ryan Lortie's nice fixes in GVariant, which I think kdbus adopts ( > https://people.gnome.org/~ryanl/gvariant-serialisation.pdf ), for the > most part these are 'cleanups' but nullable types ("maybe" types for > Haskell fans) are a notable semantic addition > * specify how it works on Windows, the Windows port last I checked > (years ago) didn't do things in a Windows-sensible way > * specify what happens when resource limits are reached > * wouldn't use XML for introspection data these days > http://dbus.freedesktop.org/doc/dbus-specification.html#introspection-format >
Nice, thanks! It seems that all of these are userspace related only. Yes I saw a "gvariant readme" in systemd sources, now I understood what it is (I'm not an expert) :D My only fear was that kdbus was trying to keep something that even dbus himself don't want. But it seems that this is not the case. Thanks, regards, Michele -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
