xml-rpc?

[Thomas Hood]

> Comments welcome,


The discussion in upstart-devel at lists.ubuntu.com may have some relevance
here.
-- 
Thomas


On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 22:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > 2007/10/11, Scott James Remnant <scott at netsplit.com>:
> >
>> > > Upstart, the IPC Server
>> > > -----------------------
>> > >
>> > > One minor, trivial change that it almost doesn't seem worth mentioning.
>> > > Upstart's own home-brew IPC will be dropped, and instead it will depend
>> > > on D-BUS.
> >
> > While I agree that D-Bus is a proven, well designed IPC mechanism I'm
> > a bit unsure if upstart should use it at its core, given that D-Bus
> > requires quite some infrastructure to get a system bus up and running
> >
Using the D-BUS System Bus requires having the dbus daemon running (as
using the D-BUS Session Bus requires having another dbus daemon running
in the user's session).

These are only the two "high level" ways of using D-BUS though; it's
also a peer-to-peer IPC protocol that you can use over any existing
sockets.

Upstart will maintain its own socket (probably with the same name), the
only difference is when you connect to it, you talk D-BUS rather than
talking a custom IPC protocol.

For niceties sake, we'll also connect to the D-BUS System Bus when it's
around, and reconnect if it goes away, etc.  But maintaining that
connection isn't critical.

Tools such as initctl are free to try the Bus Name first before
resorting to the standby socket.

> > (currently on Debian/Ubuntu the libs are in /usr/lib, there are quite
> > a lot of necessary files under /usr/share etc.)
> >
libs can be statically linked; files under /usr are only necessary for
connecting to the system bus

Scott
-- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?