On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 10:58:57PM -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 12:06 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > GNOME has a buttload of difficult to understand daemons. If one fails, or > > can't start, it is hard for an administrator to know what's going wrong or > > what it will affect. > > Where we should be going IMO is that only the dbus session daemon is > manually started; everything else is started by and lifecycle-managed by > the dbus session daemon. > > Whether by this mechanism or not, we need to get to a place where when > you turn on a feature the necessary daemon is guaranteed to be there; > e.g. the eggcups printer icon, NetworkManagerInfo etc. should be done > robustly so it's impossible to lose them from the session. For that > matter so should gnome-panel, nautilus, etc. I think Ray has a plan for > this. Nod. That's how notification-daemon is handled, which is one reason why I don't think it being its own daemon is a problem. D-BUS just activates it. If it for some reason crashes, fine, the next time something wants a notification, it gets activated again. No real loss of info, save for maybe the notification that caused the crash. Now, if the functionality of notification-daemon was integrated into some other larger part of gnome, a crash would take that all down with it. Not as fun. Christian > Havoc > > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Christian Hammond <> The Galago Project chipx86 gnupdate org <> http://galago.sourceforge.net/ Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
Attachment:
pgpQAWIv7rhF3.pgp
Description: PGP signature