Some privilege reduction patches

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Danny!

Danny Kukawka [2006-02-18 21:37 +0100]:
> How should g-p-m ever be able to replace acpid? Would you move the tasks (as 
> e.g. multiplexing acpi events via a socket to allow more than one connecting 
> application as on the kernel acpi event interface in proc) of acpid to g-p-m?  
> 
> Is this a good idea?

I don't think it is. System wide events (like processing ACPI events)
should be controlled by a system wide daemon like acpid or hal. g-p-m
can have zero or multiple instances which shouldn't step on each
other's feet; g-p-m should merely be a frontend for configuring policy
and displaying status, but the actual actions should be carried out by
acpid/hal (that is the case right now AFAICS - g-p-m uses hal as
backend).

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt        http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer   http://www.ubuntu.com
Debian Developer   http://www.debian.org

In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/hal/attachments/20060220/768b8500/attachment.pgp