|
From: | Rogelio Serrano |
Subject: | Re: Excellent technical overview of D-BUS |
Date: | Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:36:57 +0800 |
On 2004-09-01 14:54:02 +0800 Richard Frith-Macdonald <richard@brainstorm.co.uk> wrote:On 1 Sep 2004, at 06:59, Rogelio Serrano wrote:I agree. I think it is better to extend gdomap so it becomes D-BUS daemon like .That's not what I meant. I don't see any reason to extend gdomap to be like the d-bus daemon. The two daemons do different jobs, and if we want to use somethinglike d-bus, we should probably just use d-bus.I see. I think the idea of D-BUS as a 'bus' is beginning to lose appeal for me.
[snip]What about cases where i have to connect to more than one object and maintain those connections?
-- Blood is thicker then water... And much tastier John Davidorff Pell
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |