Am 26.03.2016 um 16:40 schrieb Rich Freeman: > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann > <volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> because it is broken by design, a security nightmare and seriously not >> needed at all? >> > While there is general interest in a better design, Linus believes it > is in fact needed and intends to merge the ultimate result. The > concern is with the design of kdbus itself, not the concept. It is > just a more rigorous form of IPC. > > Others are of course welcome to disagree. >
hm, back then and everytime kdbus came up on lkml the consensus was 'speed? you do it for speed? Get userspace dbus in order and the speed argument collapses'. Pretty much everybody also voiced problems with security (none) and the statefulness of dbus. All problems, blissfully ignored by the kdbus bunch.
