On Sat, 01.10.16 13:30, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi, > > I've been watching the bus1 presentation from this years systemd.conf > (thanks a lot for the video team btw for doing a stellar job). > > What didn't become clear to me i, how bus1, dbus(-daemon) and systemd > are supposed to fit together in the future. > > If I understood David correctly, bus1 is not meant as a drop-in > replacement for dbus-daemon, but rather provide some simpler, lower > level communication primitives.
Yeah, bus1 is something very different as I see it. It's not really a successor to D-Bus, and there's no intention to "port" dbus onto bus1 or anything like that. It's more another player in the world of IPC plurality, that's all. > In an earlier talk by Lennart, he mentioned that systemd will > (re)implement dbus-daemon. > Would this reimplmentation be based on bus1 or be a completely > separate re-implementation *not* using bus1? This would be purely a reimplementation of dbus-daemon, and use AF_UNIX hence. > Such a hypothetical dbus-daemon replacement based on bus1, how would > this look like and what would systemd's role be there? I don't think this is going to happen. bus1 is one thing, and dbus another. dbus is going to stay around, but we'll hopefully replace its implementation in dbus-daemon by a newer one. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
