[packagekit] viability of the current yum backend ?
rnorwood at redhat.com
Tue Jan 8 09:05:33 PST 2008
Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 08:22 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
>> You are right, it sucks to setup yum each time we do some kind of
>> packagekit backend action, the way to do it is have some kind of
>> persistence yum object loaded one time and let the the helper script
>> call it over DBUS.
So how does this work, exactly?
C Backend Python Backend
Start python backend --(exec and fork?)--Start
Run an action ----------DBUS--------> (Do Stuff)
Receive results <--------DBUS--------- Send status update
Keep alive -----------DBUS-----------> OK
"Die now" ------------DBUS-----------> OK (clean up and die)
(Sorry for the diagram)
Where the current backend lifecycle remains pretty much the same - It
starts upon receiving the first action from the frontend, and persists
for a certain amount of time after the last action in case another
action is on the way. Except now, isntead of spawning a process for
each action, and waiting for the results on STDOUT/STDERR, it spawns a
single process, and talks to it over DBUS. The python process sticks
around until it receives a "die now" from the backend, or it stops
getting 'keep alive' messages (in case the backend crashes).
Is this about what you're thinking?
Red Hat, Inc.
"The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone."
-Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching
More information about the PackageKit