On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:38:42 +0100 Axel Beckert wrote:

[...]
> Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Package notification-daemon does not seem to ship any *.service file:
> > 
> >   $ dpkg -L notification-daemon | grep -i service
> 
> But other notification daemons seem to do.
> 
> So despite it's name "notification-daemon" looking like being the most
> generic one of all of them, it looks to me as if it does not to
> provide that interface. Very unexpected.

I see.

I found [bug #918385](https://bugs.debian.org/918385), which seems to
request this .service file.
Sadly, it looks like it's still unaddressed.

> 
> > P.S.: I dropped the moreinfo tag, but, of course, feel free to re-set
> >       it, in case you need any other answer from me!
> 
> Perfectly fine. Need to think about this and investigate further.
> 
> So
> https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=Name%3Dorg.freedesktop.Notifications
> leads to this package list:
> 
> ukui-notification-daemon
> deepin-notifications
> plasma-workspace
> mako-notifier
> xfce4-notifyd
> mate-notification-daemon
> notify-osd

But not all of them actually ship a .service file:
[notify-osd](https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/notify-osd/filelist)
does not seem to.

On the other hand,
[xfce4-notifyd](https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/xfce4-notifyd/filelist)
seems to ship one.

Should I give systray-mdstat/1.2.0-1 another try, after installing
xfce4-notifyd?

Or maybe I should try with:
[ukui-notification-daemon](https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/ukui-notification-daemon/filelist)

> 
> So a short-term workaround seems to depend on only an alternative list
> of these notification daemons.

Well, please check which of them actually ship the required .service
file, first...

> 
> It's though clearly not all notification-daemons in Debian. At least
> lxqt-notificationd and some window manager/desktop environments seem
> to provide "notification-daemon", but not have such a file, too.
> 
> But since at least ukui-notification-daemon, deepin-notifications and
> mate-notification-daemon are AFAIK based on GNOME's
> notification-daemon, I tried to find something in it's changelog,
> but I only found this in the upstream changelog from 2011 (!):
> 
>   NEW in 0.7.1:
>   ==============
>   - Don't use DBus activation
> 
> And this upstream commit:
> 
> commit 1ad20d22098bc7718614a8a87744a2c22d5438d0
> Author: Matthias Clasen <mcla...@redhat.com>
> Date:   Tue Feb 15 09:52:11 2011 -0500
> 
>     Don't use dbus activation
> 
>     Dbus activation causes a race with gnome-shell at session startup.
>     Instead, install a regular desktop file, so we can make
>     notification-daemon a required component of the fallback session.
>     Finally, install notification-daemon in bindir to avoid fiddling
>     with libexecdir when generating the desktop file.
> 
>  data/Makefile.am                              | 8 +++++---
>  data/notification-daemon.desktop.in           | 7 +++++++
>  data/org.freedesktop.Notifications.service.in | 3 ---
>  src/Makefile.am                               | 2 +-
>  4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> Not sure though if it's really related, because the commit message
> seems to sound more like they just disabled starting
> notification-daemon via D-Bus and starred it always by default.

Mmmh, I do not know for sure, because I am totally ignorant about
notification daemons, but that commit seems to explain that DBus
activation causes issues.
And it seems to say that a .desktop file may be used instead (?).

Is there a way for systray-mdstat to use the .desktop interface, rather
than the .service interface?

> 
> But maybe I'm also looking at the wrong place. At least
> "org.freedesktop.Notifications" shows up all over
> notification-daemon's source code:
> https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=package%3Anotification-daemon+org.freedesktop.Notifications+package%3A%5CQnotification-daemon%5CE&literal=1
> 
> Then again, not having such a service file seems to fit with your
> observations.

Maybe there's another way to access the org.freedesktop.Notifications
interface, without relying on the .service file. I don't know!

I suspect it is worth researching in this direction...

> 
> Since I'm neither well-versed in GNOME stuff nor in D-Bus stuff, I'm
> bit out of (better) ideas at the moment.

I am sure you are way more knowledgeable than me about this subject.
It probably just needs a little more research, and you'll figure
everything out!   :-)


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

Attachment: pgp0ibV4YFdcY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to