James Westby wrote: > On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 18:01 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: >> This is known issue. >> I already discussed this with davidz quite some time ago (I noticed it >> when I tried to enable the policykit support in consolekit). >> There were also quite lengthy discussion about this topic on the hal >> mailing list about circular dependencies between CK and PK. > > Thanks, I wasn't aware that this topic had been dicussed. I'm aware > of the discussion over the circular dependency, and I agree with you. > >> We couldn't agree on a acceptable solution yet. >> Some ideas floating around, were: >> a.) ship PolicyKit.conf in libpolkit2. Imo a no-go, as it would make >> future library transitions painful (libpolkit2 and libpolkit3 wouldn't >> be co-installable) >> b.) Create the config file in libpolkit2.postinst. Would be quite >> hackish, and we'd have to move the user creation into >> libpolkit2.postinst, so we can successfully chown the file. >> c.) Move the *single* conf file into a separate package >> libpolkit-common. Quite some overhead >> d.) Do nothing within libpolkit2. Other software should gracefully >> handle the case, when polkit_context_init fails. >> e.) Change polkit_context_init to not fail if PolicyKit.conf is not >> present. Don't think this is a good idea. > > Can I ask why not e? As I point out in the upstream bug the > non-existance of the file isn't fatal when it is read to determine > the settings, so unless it is relying on the calling code stopping > after polkit_context_init failure it allows an empty file.
I was pondering about that, too. But I see it as this: polkit_context_init returning a non-zero return code means to me, that the full PolicyKit stack is not available/functional. Imo the question is: Is libpolkit actually fully usable/functional without the complete policykit package being installed? Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
