Hey.
it seems this message wasn't properly sent, or sth similar. At least i
didn't found it in the archives.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: how important is at_console block in other/wicd.conf
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 16:38:27 +0100
From: toogley <toog...@mailbox.org>
To: wicd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, w...@packages.debian.org
Hey,
my question concerns this block in other/wicd.conf:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<!-- Comment the block below if you do not want all users logged in
locally to have permission to use wicd-client. This ignores the
group based permission model defined above for the "netdev"
group. Note that this only applies if you are using ConsoleKit -
if you do not have ConsoleKit installed and in use, then this
block makes no difference either way. -->
<policy at_console="true">
<allow send_destination="org.wicd.daemon"/>
<allow send_interface="org.wicd.daemon"/>
<allow send_destination="org.wicd.daemon.wireless"/>
<allow send_interface="org.wicd.daemon.wireless"/>
<allow send_destination="org.wicd.daemon.wired"/>
<allow send_interface="org.wicd.daemon.wired"/>
<allow send_interface="org.freedesktop.DBus.Introspectable"/>
</policy>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
the current situation, as i see it:
- this block is not really debug friendly, as the behavior of wicd
changes in dependence whether consoleKit is installed or not. But this
block is the only reference in the whole wicd docs and users won't be
notified about the ignoring of the netdev UNIX group. So i think this
feature would at least cause lots of confusion and is currently not very
helpful.
- feature is depending on the deprecated Consolekit feature (according
to the comment above) and on the deprecated at_console condition.
So i think, we have 2 options:
1) remove that block above completely in the upstream sources. To me
this feature doesn't seem to be useful/important (but i don't know your
opinion on this, therefore my question) and simplifying the code is
always good, in my opinion.
2) Document this feature properly in the wicd docs/manpages and
converting it to Consolekit2 or maybe polkit (?). I think this way, we
are the most independent from systemd(which is important as Axel Beckert
pointet out here
https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2016/02/msg00245.html).
What are your thoughts about this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
wicd-devel mailing list
wicd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicd-devel
