Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932120AbbDOJBG (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2015 05:01:06 -0400 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143]:65275 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751506AbbDOJAz (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2015 05:00:55 -0400 Message-ID: <552E28C2.8070409@nod.at> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 11:00:50 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Kroah-Hartman CC: Andy Lutomirski , Al Viro , "Eric W. Biederman" , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , One Thousand Gnomes , Tom Gundersen , Jiri Kosina , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Daniel Mack , David Herrmann , Djalal Harouni Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1 References: <20150413190350.GA9485@kroah.com> <8738434yjk.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20150413194217.GA10837@kroah.com> <20150413202233.GR889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20150415084812.GG16381@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20150415084812.GG16381@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2057 Lines: 44 Am 15.04.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:54:07AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>> We had been there before. To paraphrase another... meticulously honorable >>>> person, "if you didn't want something relied upon, why have you put it into the >>>> kernel?" Said person is on the record as having no problem whatsoever with >>>> adding dependencies to the bottom of userland stack. >>> >>> It appears that, if kdbus is merged, upstream udev may end up requiring it: >>> >>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html >> >> Why so surprised? >> kdbus will be a major hard-dependency for every non-trivial userland. >> Like cgroups... > > Maybe because things like cgroups, and kdbus in the future, solves a > need that the developers in that area have to solve problems and > provide functionality that their users require? I agree that a high level bus is needed and dbus is not perfect. But this does not mean that we need a in-kernel dbus in any case. > Look, us kernel developers only work on one huge, multithreaded, global > state binary. Our experience in multi-application interactions with > shared state and permission requirements is usually quite limited. If > you don't trust the developers of those programs outside the kernel, > don't use them, there are still distros out there that don't require > them. We're all forced to use cgroups, systemd, udev unless we want to have busybox as userland. That's a fact. systemd and its dependencies are not a bad thing per se. But we have to be very sure that new hard-dependencies are in well shape before we push them into the kernel. IMHO this is also Andy and Eris's point. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/