On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 09:07 +0000, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 22:33:28 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > CC'ing Simon for the src:dbus bits. > > Have you reviewed dbus-broker for its compatibility with the reference > dbus-daemon? I still haven't been able to review it in detail myself > (when I get some time to work on dbus, maintaining the reference > implementation takes it all!) but one point I'm concerned about is whether > its systemd-based implementation of traditional activation works correctly > for services that (unnecessarily) double-fork/daemonize. > > smcv I have not done a detailed low-level review like that no - that would require way more time than I have :-) I have however used it for over a year now, in production, without any major issues or incompatibilities. Some minor bug fixes here and there, that were contributed upstream (mostly SELinux related). But I do not believe I have double-fork services - do you have a particular one in mind? I could do some quick testing. More importantly, I think it has been the default for Fedora since last year. That ought to be enough battle-testing for us to provide it as a option :-) -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part