В Пт, 22/03/2019 в 23:56 +0300, Andrew Savchenko пишет:
--->%---
> > - Making pambase always install the configuration for
> > pam_elogind.so,
> > the same way it does for pam_gnome_keyring.so at this very moment,
> > effectively removing elogind USE flag from it.
>
> Maybe
Hi,
For time being the IUSE has been reverted to the old +suid, elogind is
now opt-in and not enabled by default. This preserves the old,
working-for-everyone-everywhere default flags.
-- Piotr.
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
On Fri, 2019-03-22 at 21:32 +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to discuss here the current state of elogind integration as a
> whole, and the follow-up work that is now required, after I've put a
> default on local USE flag +elogind on xorg-server while dropping default
> suid flag i
On Freitag, 22. März 2019 22:07:54 CET Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> I am not a big fan of that, but for sure, that would address the issues,
> however I am really worried about what to do later with xorg-server. I
> *really* do not want suid to be enabled there by default permanently, if
> we go the fo
On 2019.03.22 20:32, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
[snip]
> - We should go back to +suid -elogind default.
> - We should actually NOT put suid on Xorg if USE="suid elogind" but
> put
> suid bit with USE="suid -elogind".
> - We should only ever enable elogind in desktop profiles.
>
> Personally
Hi,
On 22/03/2019 21.47, Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
> Therefore, not one single package, unless it hard-depends on exactly-one-of (
> elogind systemd ) should enable elogind by default at this time. Doing so now
> only makes people switch it off globally either before or after they are
> facin
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:32:16 +0100 Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to discuss here the current state of elogind integration as a
> whole, and the follow-up work that is now required, after I've put a
> default on local USE flag +elogind on xorg-server while dropping default
> suid flag i
Hi,
On 22/03/2019 21.43, Brian Evans wrote:
> What are the implications, if any, of using DMs which are not aware of
> {,e}logind? Do they work without modification?
My understanding is that such DMs, like lightdm, fork X as root anyway,
so there's no implication here, regardless if you have -el
Short anwer: Right now, xorg-server[+elogind] is at odds with desktop profile
that still has +consolekit by default.
For good reasons (long answer):
elogind integration tracker not yet done: https://bugs.gentoo.org/599470
bluez hard-requiring systemd with user-session: https://bugs.gentoo.org/63
On 3/22/2019 4:32 PM, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose doing the following:
>
> - Keywording elogind on missing archs
> - Making elogind a global USE flag
> - Switching desktop profiles to elogind from consolekit while still
> preserving -suid +elogind on xorg-server for those
Hi,
I'd like to discuss here the current state of elogind integration as a
whole, and the follow-up work that is now required, after I've put a
default on local USE flag +elogind on xorg-server while dropping default
suid flag in my commit yesterday.
The motivation on the changes was to follow up
11 matches
Mail list logo
