Re: Compatibility between D-Bus and kdbus

Simon McVittie <simon.mcvittie-ZGY8ohtN/[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.freedesktop.dbus
Organization Collabora Ltd.
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 26/11/14 18:17, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 November 2014 13:02:52 Simon McVittie wrote:
>> For existing libraries, this sounds like an argument in favour of having
>> a separate DBUS_BUS_SESSION_KDBUS (or whatever you want to call it, but
>> basically it means "allowed to be kdbus")
> 
> A new environment variable? I"m not sure how that follows from the discussion.
> Can you elaborate?

No, I don't mean a new environment variable, I mean a new DBusBusType
(and the GDBus, QtDBus, etc. equivalents) alongside DBUS_BUS_SESSION
(and the GDBus, QtDBus, etc. equivalents).

The system bus certainly needs a new DBusBusType anyway, because in
general things that connect to DBUS_BUS_SYSTEM expect dbus-daemon to
enforce their security policies from /etc/dbus-1/system.d.

I initially thought the session bus didn't necessarily need this,
because in practice /etc/dbus-1/session.d isn't used; but if
compatibility with other aspects of kdbus semantics is a concern, then a
new thing alongside DBUS_BUS_SESSION as a way to opt-in to kdbus
semantics might be a necessary evil.

    S

_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.