On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:27:17PM +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 07:47:54PM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:29:32 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
> > > All we need is DBus.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this is wrong. From a compilation/linking POV we really
> > don
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 07:47:54PM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:29:32 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
All we need is DBus.
Unfortunately, this is wrong. From a compilation/linking POV we really
don't need anything more than D-Bus.
Good, we should compile as much code as we
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:29:32 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
> All we need is DBus.
Unfortunately, this is wrong. From a compilation/linking POV we really
don't need anything more than D-Bus. But we polkit to actually work, we
need more. Thus we can end up enabling polkit even though it is not
actuall
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 10:29 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
[...]
> +dnl All we need to talk to polkit is DBus, no need to check
> +dnl for anything else.
The correct name is D-Bus, here and in the commit message.
Also, the second part of the comment ("no need...") doesn't
add any useful informat
All we need is DBus.
Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko
---
m4/virt-polkit.m4 | 30 +++---
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/m4/virt-polkit.m4 b/m4/virt-polkit.m4
index 5c2a3c1e3..1016df4b3 100644
--- a/m4/virt-polkit.m4
+++ b/m4/virt-polkit.m4
@@ -25,
