Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:53:53PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Sure, I can write one binary to rule them all, pull out all the code from all
> tools I need, but for me an IPC mechanism sounds a lot better. And it should be
> _one_ common IPC mechanism and not a plethora of them. It should feel like an
> operating system and not like a bunch of thrown together software, which is
> glued together with some magic shell scripts.

And so requiring wireshark (and X?) in initramfs to debug problems
once dbus is introduced is better?

I would think shell scripts are *easier* to debug when things go
wrong, especially in a minimal environment such as an initial ram
disk.  Having had to debug problems in a distro initramfs when trying
to help a customer bring up a FC boot disk long ago in another life,
I'm certain I would rather debug problems while on site at a
classified machine room[1] using shell scripts, and trying to debug
dbus is something that would be infinitely worse.

						- Ted

[1] So no laptop, no google, no access to sources to figure out random
dbus messages, etc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/