Clarification on upstart-0.5 and dbus usage

Scott James Remnant scott at
Thu Jun 19 01:16:14 BST 2008

On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 17:04 -0700, Saravanan Shanmugham (sarvi) wrote:

> But that said, D-Bus is a fine choice for now. I hope though, the
> Upstart community is open to code contributions from us that allow for
> modular alternatives to D-Bus. Ofcourse without compromising on
> performance or clean code.
Would the effort not be better spend fixing whatever problem(s) you have
with D-Bus?

It really has become the standard communication mechanism for Linux, and
would greatly benefit from an embedded eye.

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the upstart-devel mailing list