~kennylevinsen/seatd-devel

2

Re: [vision and specification of session management, comparison to ConsoleKit2 and systemd]

Greg V
Details
Message ID
<QHZRRQ.73ZI29COPK131@unrelenting.technology>
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
Hello there,

 > If interest is there, support could be added to libseat for 
ConsoleKit2
backends.

I just got this working currently:
https://github.com/DankBSD/seatd/tree/ck2

However, ConsoleKit2 is not actively maintained anymore.
It was a direct predecessor of logind, logind has basically killed it.

I'm not sure if CK2 is worth supporting in upstream libseat considering 
that.

My actual plan is to reimplement the login1 D-Bus API in Rust 
(primarily for FreeBSD),
and to make libseat's logind backend support using it via basu :)

Re: [vision and specification of session management, comparison to ConsoleKit2 and systemd]

Details
Message ID
<F81SRQ.QT1S8RQOM1TD3@kl.wtf>
In-Reply-To
<QHZRRQ.73ZI29COPK131@unrelenting.technology> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 22:58, Greg V <greg@unrelenting.technology> 
wrote:
> I'm not sure if CK2 is worth supporting in upstream libseat 
> considering that.

Possibly not.

> My actual plan is to reimplement the login1 D-Bus API in Rust 
> (primarily for FreeBSD),
> and to make libseat's logind backend support using it via basu :)

Any reason to not just use seatd though? It supports FreeBSD out of the 
box. libseat support is growing as well.

Best regards,
Kenny Levinsen

Re: [vision and specification of session management, comparison to ConsoleKit2 and systemd]

Details
Message ID
<XL2SRQ.W3D98WYJ6JYH2@kl.wtf>
In-Reply-To
<F81SRQ.QT1S8RQOM1TD3@kl.wtf> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 22:36, Kenny Levinsen <kl@kl.wtf> wrote:
>> I'm not sure if CK2 is worth supporting in upstream libseat 
>> considering that.
> 
> Possibly not.

Maybe I should elaborate a bit further on that: While indeed it doesn't 
seem like it makes a whole lot of sense to support, should a 
significant interest manifest itself for some reason, we might adopt it 
upstream anyway.

As you have shown, it is not that much code, and it's mostly identical 
to the logind backend.
Reply to thread Export thread (mbox)