libhal-policy -> PolicyKit
Artem Kachitchkine
Artem.Kachitchkin at Sun.COM
Thu Mar 9 13:50:31 PST 2006
> I thought about this and I think we are safe:
>
> 1. The PolicyKit daemon will be single threaded and process requests
> sequentially; and
>
> 2. temporary_policy_override will just be an in-memory object - the
> backing store will _not_ be modified for this; and
>
> 3. The Disconnected signal from the message bus for pid X
> is guaranteed to arrive before a new call to the PolicyKit service
> checking for the stuff in temporary_policy_override is done by
> another pid X.
As long as the daemon's request queue is an in-memory object, I think
we're safe even without the two last items. In any case I wouldn't rely
on 3.
-Artem.
More information about the hal
mailing list