Re: DBUS signals?

[Jussi Lahtinen <jussi.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxx>]

>
>    - that it is more like IPC than a registry, in fact it is IPC
>    - the overall sense of things when some many familiar terms are used,
>    that mean something different
>    - what those damn "objects" were and how to use them to my benefit
>    - how it bloody works at all.
>
> That's why I sent those pictures. It how I see it today... and it works! 😮
>
> There is some kilograms of intertube discussions on why and why it is
> better than sockets, pipes, files and ... what do you mean by system
> signals? SIGthis and SIGthat etc? If so, because it is much richer than
> them. Which reminds me ... you originally seemed to imply that SIGTERM
> doesn't work anymore? I have had no problem with it as recently as an hour
> ago when I wanted to kill an obscure program by the name of firefox that
> had gone out of control, again (God forbid).
>
Yes, I know it is IPC built on top of sockets. My criticism is the
messiness just like in the registry and in fact registry is also used
partly as IPC. Imagine if signal for preparation for shutdown would have
been implemented in the unix way... a status file, which would simply
contain; running, shutting down, etc and perhaps time left. This would be
very easy to check with any programming language with few lines of code.
And you could not miss it, because it would persist as long as it is valid.
Now I need shit load of code to even try and fail. The unix way would be
superior in all ways.
DBUS doesn't offer "anything else" than a structured and standardized way
to use sockets... I'm not convinced it was worth the trouble.

And yes, I mean SIG* codes. I wasn't clear, they DO work, but the problem
is they are not send for GUI programs on shutdown. If they were, I would
have no problems. Right now this fancy new way only break things for me.