[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Should libpam-elogind Provide libpam-systemd ?

On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:22:58PM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2018 at 12:20:55 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > please work with packages
> > that depend on libpam-systemd to add appropriate alternatives like
> > libpam-systemd | libpam-elogind if and *only* if they work with both.
> Yes, this. libpam-elogind is very unlikely to be enough to satisfy
> dbus-user-session's dependency, for instance, unless elogind has taken
> an excursion into systemd-like service management while I wasn't looking.

And for that reason dbus-user-session has Depends: systemd, which describes
this requirement just fine.  It runs systemd's user parts.  The rest of the
world has dbus-x11 which has some important features dbus-user-session
lacks, such as the ability to login multiple times.

A package whose very description says in its title:
"simple interprocess messaging system (systemd --user integration)"
depends on systemd, that's not surprising.  So as long as no dependency
chain forces it in, all is ok.

> Some packages depending on libpam-systemd want logind's D-Bus and
> libsystemd APIs, which elogind can mostly or entirely provide; policykit-1
> is likely to be one of these.
> Other packages depending on libpam-systemd want systemd --user, which
> elogind can't provide, and which I'm reasonably sure people who don't
> like systemd wouldn't want anyway (if you have a reason not to want
> systemd managing system services as pid 1, then the same reason probably
> applies equally to your per-user services).

Is there a package that wants something beyond logind, yet doesn't depend on
systemd itself?  I can't seem to find any obvious candidate.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Have you heard of the Amber Road?  For thousands of years, the
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ Romans and co valued amber, hauled through the Europe over the
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ mountains and along the Vistula, from Gdańsk.  To where it came
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ together with silk (judging by today's amber stalls).

Reply to: