Gene Heskett wrote: > I will stand in defense of dbus. It and its predecessors have helped to > automate my email handling to a minimum amount of work for me. With its > help, an incoming msg, being written to /var/mail/$usr by procmail, is > available for me to take action in kmail appriximately .25 seconds after > procmail has closed the file. Losing dbus would multiply the needed > mouse clicks by 2 or more, and add me as a variable delay to its > visibility in kmail. My comment was a bit of a raising flag for brain food. I don't think anyone would manage to get rid of dbus unless there is a better alternative - and so far we have not seen one. But this is my personal opinion. This mostly affects the desktop side, but as shown in bluetooth there are a lot of application utilizing dbus already. regards --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
