On Montag 15 Februar 2010, Mike Edenfield wrote: > On 2/15/2010 2:20 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > > J. Roeleveld wrote: > >>> 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. > > > > Why not simply using tmpfs ? > > Or an specific synthetic filesystem ? 9P makes this really easy, > > and network agnostic. > > I'm kinda stunned that your arguments against D-Bus seems to boil down > to "just use 9p instead" given that plumber is a basic element of 9p and > does essentially the same job D-Bus does. So you're just swapping one > system-wide general-purpose IPC service out for another one?
he is just trolling around.
