> Well, I guess they try to 'integrate' again, all config in one place, > but again only for their bubble. Isn't there already an OS with such a terrible, bloated and cryptical all config in one place database called registry? And wasn't there a principle in Unix/Linux: "Everything is a file."? Both were two of many reasons why I completely switched from Windows to Linux years ago. I really don't understand why now also on Linux configs have to be saved in such gconf (still text files) or even worse sqlite databases, which make those software nearly unmaintainable and slow. Why not just stay with the good old text files which can simply be edited with a console text editor? GConf still uses text files. Unfortunately, they are in XML. On the other hand, you can use gconf-editor to change settings via scripts without doing checks to make sure you are changing the right thing. Too bad GNOME programs don't access GConf to give you access to all of the settings, so you don't need to use GConf directly. Hmm. The glass is half full or half empty. I, too, don't like those dbus, hal, console-kit stuff. I even don't like udev with its many, quite complicated udev rules. In the past I could simply create a device node for a device and it worked and I and the system knew how to access a specific hardware. I of course see that udev has some advantages but the way it is designed makes the system (the device naming) pretty inconsistent. I don't see the advantages of hal and console-kit - I even don't know what they are for. Usually hardware can easily accessed by the device files in /dev, infos about the hardware can be obtained by lspci and lsusb, through /proc etc.. What is console-kit for? I usually have a console and can login without such an additional daemon which in my opinion only takes system ressources. Not so good on slow computers and also not the best on fast computers. I like HAL and Dbus, although I heard that HAL will disappear. I like having my thumb drive automatically mounted when I stick it in or my camera being recognized. Or X.org configuring itself automatically without my intervention (at least when it works). On the other hand, I would prefer that Dbus not have any DE dependencies like GNOME. It should be treated like a low-level interface only. I can live with glib dependencies because it is basically a set of useful tools like lists, strings, etc., for C.
