oFono, a FSO Clone from Intel and Nokia

NeilBrown neilb at suse.de
Sun May 17 12:30:51 CEST 2009

On Sun, May 17, 2009 6:42 pm, Klaus 'mrmoku' Kurzmann wrote:
> Am Sonntag 17 Mai 2009 10:23:42 schrieb Franky Van Liedekerke:
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 02:13:39 +0200
>> "Michael 'Mickey' Lauer" <mickey at vanille-media.de> wrote:
>> > On Sunday 17 May 2009 02:05:09 Franky Van Liedekerke wrote:
>> > > I totally agree with with this point of view. Don't let the
>> > > competition get to you, just be the best.
>> > > Personally, I don't believe in fso, but that's because I don't like
>> > > python, nothing else :-)
>> >
>> > Aha, so you don't believe in the API because you don't like the
>> > language the first implementation is in?
>> totally different story. I can't judge the API, because I never played
>> around in developing in FSO to get to know the API.
> well... one of the advantages of a dbus API is, that you can play around
> with
> it in pretty any language you like, no?

Shell scripts ???

I must confess that I abandoned FSO some time ago because I don't
like D-BUS.
My own little toy stack uses files to pass data between applications.
dnotify and locks make up most of the rest of the picture.  Oh, and
"exec" to invoke some service like sending a txt message.

I modified gsm0710muxd to listen on a unix-domain socket so I could
avoid D-BUS there too.  Admittedly shell scripts cannot talk to
unix domain sockets either ... and I am almost tempted to added
support for AF_INET sockets so that I can use netcat to talk to
it.  But I haven't yet.

I suspect there is a good chance I will get sick of building my
on stack one day and use something supported by someone else, but
for now I'm having fun.  I'm actually a big fan of the Knights of NIH :-)


More information about the devel mailing list