On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 21:48 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > The problem is daemons that have be persistent; alarm daemons, things > that own X selections, and so forth. At least for stuff with GUI (i.e. > calls gtk_init()) there's a fair bit of overhead per-process. But shouldn't we be working on solving that problem in general? Unless it's also being suggested to shove every application into a single process as well? > We already > have one "big daemon with lots of small unrelated stuff in it" (gnome- > settings-daemon) for this reason. We could easily have 50 little daemons > if we don't cram some stuff together, and if you take the base GTK > overhead as 200K (too low last time I was paying attention), that's 10 > megs. 50 sounds excessive; from a glance at CVS, 17 looks closer to the mark. Anyways, I wasn't suggesting that gnome-settings-daemon be broken up; see below. > Right now we can't > security-jail anything that connects to the X server anyhow, for > example. Yes, but that will be fixed. > We probably want anything big/complicated to be its own daemon, also. > Since we wouldn't want it to crash the main one. Ok, as long as we're agreeing it should be possible to run desktop extensions in a separate process, I'm perfectly happy. I just don't want to hardcode it. There's no reason that the extension code would need to be any different between the two cases anyways; it could just be a flag in the XML file or whatever.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part