4 ms·

I've seen a lot of these comments to this effect but I'm still not quite sure: what is the issue with dbus? Is there another replacement that meets all the use

• detaro 5y ago
  Question is if an init system needs all the use cases dbus can support. Dbus always feels unwieldy to work with, especially once you leave specific desktop stacks, and for me personally, the biggest failures of systemd-based systems have been issues with dbus not working properly for whatever reason.
  • zxzax 5y ago
    I don't know the status of this on a practical level (e.g. in any given distro) but systemd does support daemonless dbus access over a private socket (/var/run/systemd/private) in some scenarios. Would that help?
• GekkePrutser 5y ago
  The problem I have with it is that it's not easy to interact with, and something that's very desktop focused. I think it's one of the examples of Systemd pulling in way too wide a scope.
  • zxzax 5y ago
    Can you elaborate? I found it very easy to interact with once I learned how to use the tooling (busctl, d-feet, etc). I also don't think I would say it's desktop-focused, it was designed for that use case originally, but it seems it can be used by anything else that happens to use a similar OOP-based RPC design (and it seems systemd is one of those things). Is there another replacement that's of a smaller scope that would cover all the use cases that systemd needs?