FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-14-2010, 05:38 PM
Enrico Weigelt
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> don't waste your time - dbis is already there...

dbus lets me access my network interfaces via filesystem ?


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

cellphone: +49 174 7066481 email: info@metux.de skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Old 02-14-2010, 05:44 PM
Enrico Weigelt
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> no, but with static exes you have to recompile everything
> everytime a security bug is found.

That's the job of the distro buildsystem. Ah, and that dramatically
minimizes the chance that things break apart (i still remember
the old times when libc updates tended to be dangerous).

> Oh - and didn't you just complain about bloat? Nothing means
> more bloat than static binaries.

As already said, all this under the axiom that libs are *small*
and complex/redundant things are done by separate services.
Perhaps you might have a look at Plan9 and how its done there.


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

cellphone: +49 174 7066481 email: info@metux.de skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Old 02-14-2010, 05:46 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > don't waste your time - dbis is already there...
>
> dbus lets me access my network interfaces via filesystem ?

no, it is ported to different architectures.
 
Old 02-14-2010, 05:52 PM
Enrico Weigelt
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>>> don't waste your time - dbis is already there...
>> dbus lets me access my network interfaces via filesystem ?
>
> no, it is ported to different architectures.

the only thing i have yet to port is the networking stuff.
everything else is just plain ansi-c using posix APIs.


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

cellphone: +49 174 7066481 email: info@metux.de skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Old 02-14-2010, 06:08 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> >>> don't waste your time - dbis is already there...
> >>
> >> dbus lets me access my network interfaces via filesystem ?
> >
> > no, it is ported to different architectures.
>
> the only thing i have yet to port is the networking stuff.
> everything else is just plain ansi-c using posix APIs.

and posix works everywhere ... yeah.
 
Old 02-14-2010, 06:08 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > no, but with static exes you have to recompile everything
> > everytime a security bug is found.
>
> That's the job of the distro buildsystem. Ah, and that dramatically
> minimizes the chance that things break apart (i still remember
> the old times when libc updates tended to be dangerous).

and even better - just introduce a single patch/updated package and everything
is fine. What you are describing is maybe nice with gentoo. But a nightmare if
you want something stable. Recompiling everything is not an option.

Why do you think the whole industry went away from static - except for tiny
embedded devices?

>
> > Oh - and didn't you just complain about bloat? Nothing means
> > more bloat than static binaries.
>
> As already said, all this under the axiom that libs are *small*
> and complex/redundant things are done by separate services.
> Perhaps you might have a look at Plan9 and how its done there.

no, under the axiom of sharable code. The size of a lib is not really
important - except if you use everything. But if you compile in everything the
lib does on a static basis, all your binaries are huge and bloated.
 
Old 02-14-2010, 06:13 PM
Neil Bothwick
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:27:45 +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:

> > For example, Network Manager uses D-Bus to tell programs when
> > your Internet connection is available and not, so your mail
> > client goes into offline mode rather than pointlessly
> > trying to access your mailbox.
>
> Why should an MUA care about some local interface at all ?
> It doesnt say anything whether the server can be reached, it's
> nothing more than guessing, that *might* be fine for trivial
> setups but can cause big headache in more complex ones.

I think this thread has had enough people trying to find specific use
cases where IPC would not be useful and trying to use that as some sort
of justification for it never being useful.

You're a little late for the party.


--
Neil Bothwick

"There are no stupid questions, just too many inquisitive idiots."
 
Old 02-14-2010, 06:39 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sunday 14 February 2010 16:40:01 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > Just to bring this back to your original statement of Unix philosophy.
> > IPC on modern desktops conforms exactly to the Unix philosophy.
>
> On dbus, everything's a file ?

You are either ignorant, or trying to be a jackass. Either way, it's obvious
you do not underatand Unix philosophy

"Everything is a file" is but one of many engineering concepts underpinning
Unix. I really don't have the inclination to delineate them for you, I suggest
you Google the topic - it will serve you well in future.

Meanwhile, here's the short description of the main principle behind what I
said:

"A large collection of small programs, each of which does one thing well."

The one thing an MUA does well is NOT popup notifications but dealing with
mail - retrieving it (or causing it to be retrieved), sending it (or causing
it to be sent) and displaying it to be read.

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 02-14-2010, 06:50 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sunday 14 February 2010 20:44:32 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > no, but with static exes you have to recompile everything
> > everytime a security bug is found.
>
> That's the job of the distro buildsystem. Ah, and that dramatically
> minimizes the chance that things break apart (i still remember
> the old times when libc updates tended to be dangerous).
>
> > Oh - and didn't you just complain about bloat? Nothing means
> > more bloat than static binaries.
>
> As already said, all this under the axiom that libs are *small*
> and complex/redundant things are done by separate services.
> Perhaps you might have a look at Plan9 and how its done there.


To be fair, Plan9 is Unix done right.

For all it's power, Unix (the system, not just the kernel) has some very
severe flaws. Why can't I prepend data to a file using any of the common
shells? Why are pipes 1 input 1 output, instead of the more useful 1 input
same data to 2 or more outputs? Why is the permission model so simplistic? Why
is ELF so prone to bloat (or more accurately why do so many compilers generate
such large libs?)

The answer is because of the available constraints at the time these things
were introduced. Partly the amount of grunt available from systems of the
time, partly the speed of disks, partly to keep things simple and to an
irreducible minimum, with a huge helping of how easy a platform it is to
develop on.

For better or worse, what we have is what we have and it's the sum total of
the past.


--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 02-15-2010, 08:57 AM
"J. Roeleveld"
 
Default How the HAL are you supposed to use these files?

On Sunday 14 February 2010 15:27:45 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
<snipped>
>
> And *IF* some application is interested in the such information,
> why not just using the filesystem ?

Because on flash-drives (Which are used in small devices and netbooks) you
don't want every single status update to be written to the filesystem.
And with minimal memory, I don't want to have a ram-disk gobbling up the
memory I have.

A simple message passed to apps which are listening is much better. It's
short-lived and only uses (minimal) resources when the message is broadcast.
After that, it doesn't linger, unless I am running an app that stores these
messages somewhere. (Probably a debugger)

--
Joost
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org