Quick thing to point out, COM and D-BUS are fundamentially different in that COM objects are usually loaded in-process, whereas D-BUS is used to communicate between running processes. Interoperability has a number of different dimensions, and concurrency/flow-of-control issues are a critical but often overlooked aspect of that.
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 11:40:27AM -0500, Reed Hedges wrote: > Lalo Martins wrote: > > > Conversely, on Linux, I have long wanted to have d-bus bindings, which > > would achieve more or less the same effect. That is something that > > probably will be in s5 out of the box -- you add a site extension > > (assuming site extensions exist in s5; or whatever is the equivalent if > > they don't), and you get d-bus, similar to how you get VIP. > > Part of dbus support will have to be semantic bridging too. Either in > the VOS site extension or in a seperate native_dbus-vos_dbus daemon; > doing it in the site extension probably makes the most sense I think. > So adding and removing services looks like adding/removing vobjects; > changing the prenesce status of your avatar sends a dbus event to > synchronize with other IM systems, etc. > > Reed > > _______________________________________________ > vos-d mailing list > vos-d@interreality.org > http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d -- [ Peter Amstutz ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet] [ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ] [ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey: pgpkeys.mit.edu 18C21DF7 ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
