Dbus is very appealing indeed. I think if we were to use it we should not rely on the system or session services so we would need to provide either a completly standalone server or fallback to standalone if we cant connect to the session bus.
I think once dbus gets picked up it will eventually get ported to windows. On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 23:28, Hubert Figuiere wrote: > On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 20:51, David A. Desrosiers wrote: > > > My vote goes to D-Bus. D-Bus is written to be portable so portability > > > shouldn't be an issue. > > > > Does Solaris currently have support for D-Bus? What about Win32 > > (where this can be easily ported)? FreeBSD? Other Unixes? Anything other > > than Linux? > > http://dbus.freedesktop.org/ > In 0.5 changelog: > port to OS X and other BSD variants > port to Solaris > > Should port easily everywhere in the UNIX world. For Win I can't tell, I > don't do that. > As I told before, D-Bus is designed to be portable. > > Hub > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Multisync-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/multisync-devel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Multisync-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/multisync-devel
