You wrote: > * From: David Zeuthen <david fubar dk> > * To: gtk-devel-list gnome org > * Subject: EggDBus > * Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:48:25 -0500 > > Hey, > > For the past 5 weeks or so, I've been working on a new (as compared to > dbus-glib) D-Bus binding for GObject. The work on this has finally > reached a stage where the code sufficiently complete and documented so I > thought I'd send some mail describing it. The code is here
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~david/eggdbus Nine months later, some packages already started to use libeggdbus. For example, PolicyKit. I got curious (or maybe "appalled") by the number of libraries this "simple password prompter lib" pulls in, so I looked at it. Aside form much other stuff which is not relevant to this email, it pulls in libeggdbus directly, and libdbus-glib indirectly: # ldd /usr/lib64/libpolkit-gobject-1.so.0 ... libeggdbus-1.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libeggdbus-1.so.0 (0x00007fbf5c314000) ... libdbus-glib-1.so.2 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-glib-1.so.2 (0x00007fbf5b3a1000) ... which made me wonder, how come a replacement for libdbus-glib and libdbus-glib itself live in the same program. Ain't that code duplication? Let's see why... readelf -a says that libdbus-glib-1 is not directly used by libpolkit-gobject: Dynamic section at offset 0x1fb50 contains 26 entries: Tag Type Name/Value 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libeggdbus-1.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgio-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgobject-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgmodule-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libglib-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6] 0x000000000000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libpolkit-gobject-1.so.0] It is apparently pulled in by libeggdbus: # ldd /usr/lib64/libeggdbus-1.so.0 linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x00007fffe85ff000) libgio-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libgio-2.0.so.0 (0x00007fa5b6355000) libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0x00007fa5b6152000) libdbus-glib-1.so.2 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-glib-1.so.2 (0x00007fa5b5f30000) libdbus-1.so.3 => /lib64/libdbus-1.so.3 (0x00007fa5b5cf2000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007fa5b5ad6000) librt.so.1 => /lib64/librt.so.1 (0x00007fa5b58cd000) libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0x00007fa5b5686000) libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x00007fa5b53a0000) libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007fa5b5031000) libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00007fa5b4e2d000) libresolv.so.2 => /lib64/libresolv.so.2 (0x00007fa5b4c14000) libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00007fa5b49f5000) libcap.so.2 => /lib64/libcap.so.2 (0x00007fa5b47f1000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fa5b6871000) libattr.so.1 => /lib64/libattr.so.1 (0x00007fa5b45ec000) readelf -a: Dynamic section at offset 0x46768 contains 29 entries: Tag Type Name/Value 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgio-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgmodule-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libdbus-glib-1.so.2] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libdbus-1.so.3] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [librt.so.1] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgobject-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libglib-2.0.so.0] 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6] 0x000000000000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libeggdbus-1.so.0] So, your "new D-Bus binding for GObject" is making programs use both at once anyway. Also, it is more than twice as big as libdbus-glib just by itself: # size /usr/lib64/libeggdbus-1.so.0 text data bss dec hex filename 281912 10776 504 293192 47948 /usr/lib64/libeggdbus-1.so.0 # size /usr/lib64/libdbus-glib-1.so.2 text data bss dec hex filename 128367 4612 328 133307 208bb /usr/lib64/libdbus-glib-1.so.2 I do not know, maybe it presents some significantly nicer C interface for the programmer, but on code size front it does not look good. Sorry for intruding into your time and basically saying that you write bloated code, but I wanted to make you aware of this aspect too. Feel free to ignore this email if you don't care. -- vda _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
