Hi Sarvi, > Actually I seem to agree with Scott on this, that it is OK for Upstart > to depepend on a System Bus( or some key piece of infrastruture) to be > fully funcitonal. > > As I understand it, Upstart will be able to start/stop/restart processes > without D-Bus. Only when the rest of the world wants to talk to Upstart > is D-Bus really needed and it seems reasonable to require it. > > Here I am using the word D-Bus in place of a need for a reasonably > flexible communication/messaging mechanism. > Until D-Bus becomes as ubiquituous as Unix domain sockets, tying > communication with D-Bus.
D-Bus is that already today. > But that said, D-Bus is a fine choice for now. I hope though, the > Upstart community is open to code contributions from us that allow for > modular alternatives to D-Bus. Ofcourse without compromising on > performance or clean code. I think that Scott and I explained that this would only increase complexity inside Upstart and that this makes basically no sense. We don't need support for two IPC mechanism. We use D-Bus. And if D-Bus looks like such a problem to you, then even Upstart might not be the right solution for you. Regards Marcel -- upstart-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel
