Sent from Outlook Mail for Windows 10
From: Bruce Dubbs Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2015 9:59 AM To: BLFS Development List Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] sddm Ken Moffat wrote: > With further testing the upowerd and udisks2 startups also reported > errors. The whole thing is so complex that I begin to unbderstand > some of the desire for systemd. The design is overly borked. What's wrong with setting up a group or groups to designate the capabilities. If the user is a member of the group, then those capabilities are granted. No need for dbus at all. It may be that in 1% of commercial situations the policy stuff is needed, but it's again the attitude that one size fits all. If anyone needs a complex solution, then lets saddle everyone with the complex solution. It all seems counter-intuitive to me. The only systems that need things like hibernate and suspend are laptops. They do not have multiple users. systemd as a complex solution for an artificially complex permissions system? Madness. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page ----------------------- Bruce have you tested sddm against ConsoleKit2 to see if the new functions imported from systemd-logind rectify the situation. -Kenny
-- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
