On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 10:04:44AM -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 3:58 pm, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> <zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> >AFAIK, it's just implementing an obsolete concept. The session bus is
> >started by systemd --user, which is triggered by the pam stack
> >when the user
> >session is created. So it is generally fair to assume that the
> >session bus
> >always present. I don't know why gdm still uses the helper.
> 
> I think container images typically do not run systemd at all, right?
> That's where dbus-run-session is generally used, e.g. for CI images.
> I'm not sure how else you would expect CI would ever work. At least,
> many GNOME tests are going to fail if a D-Bus session is not
> available.
>
> Yes, dbus-daemon can be installed manually in CI images. But if you
> want dbus-broker to *really* replace dbus-daemon, such that the
> dbus-daemon package can be retired, it would need to learn to cover
> this case.

%check dependencies are fine. Even systemd pulls in dbus-daemon (or at
least did in the past) to test dbus interoperatibility. But this doesn't
mean that it should be required in normal installations.

(And I don't the goal is to retire dbus-daemon. It remains the reference
implementation, and I hope it remains available in Fedora, as long as
it is supported upstream.)

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to