On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Lennart Poettering <[email protected]>wrote:
> Heya, > > I am typing this from a GNOME session that actually uses a kdbus user > bus instead of a dbus-daemon session bus (and also a kdbus system > bus). With this mail I'd like to start discussion of the changes I'd > like to propose for GNOME to make this work a bit more smoothly. > > As you might now, the kdbus userspace we have been working on involves > using systemd for setting it up. The system systemd instance will set up > the system bus, and the user systemd instance will set up the user > bus. Besides actually opening up kdbus for usage in the session bus, I'd > also like to see GNOME adopt systemd for its process (application) > management needs. This would have a number of benefits, like for example > exposing GNOME apps (and other components) as cgroups, so that we can do > all kinds of modern stuff like suspending apps that our outside of view, > or fiddling with the CPU scheduling prio for foreground apps, and things > like that. Also, we'd gain a trustable, kernel-level way how to > distuingish apps, for polkit stuff and more. > > Now, systemd is not available on all systems GNOME supports, so we > should find a way that neatly hooks this all up with systemd, but > doesn't make systemd a hard-coded dependency of GNOME. Of course, the > internets will never honour our attempt at being nice here, but we > should try anyway... ;-) > With my release team hat on: Nice of you to think of this. > So, the way I'd like this all to work is by simply emphasizing .desktop > files and bus activation a lot more, without actually emphasizing > systemd as backend implementation of anything. As both technologies > (.desktop files and dbus) are universially supported wherever GNOME is > supported this should be a good approach: > [...] Does this make sense? Suggestions? Ideas? > We've already been steadily moving towards bus activation for applications, so this general idea fits very naturally with the direction we've been going. I'm sure we'll have long discussions about per-user vs per-session and similar details, but this should not be controversial. Moving gnome-session from exec'ing to dbus activation for most things should also be fine. You can already make that happen today, by putting gapplication launch <your-app-id> in the Exec line. The only thing I've seen in this discussion that I disagree with is the idea to make the distinction between starting a service (in the background) and launching the application (opening a window) implicit, by looking at somewhat obscure environment variables. That should be rather be explicit, I think, and we want to limit the extent to which applications are allowed to do that (run in the background).
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
