ConsoleKit 0.2.4

S.Çağlar Onur caglar at
Thu Jan 24 14:23:00 PST 2008


24 Oca 2008 Per tarihinde, Matthias Clasen şunları yazmıştı: 
> On Jan 24, 2008 3:01 PM, Michael Biebl <mbiebl at> wrote:
> > No, there should be a new component sitting on top of CK and HAL.
> > Simple, isn't it.
> >
> > > This picture is much closer to the truth:
> >
> > No, it isn't.
> At this point, we should agree to disagree and move on.

I do not think its that simple and i also do not see the "we cannot agree on 
that, so lets move on" thing is an option.

I always thought that ConsoleKit will only responsible for "tracking users, 
login sessions, and seats" as its description says. And what i understand 
from that claim is really simple and clear like following;

ConsoleKit will be used for others (Others somehow that needs session/user 
information, say HAL, X-Kit, Z-Manager etc.) as an information provider. So 
these others will decide _what to do or not to do_ based on these 

So if we start to implement _these actions_ in ConsoleKit and let ConsoleKit 
decide itself _what to do or not to do_ thats clearly a design violation (at 
least for me). And if we really need a decision maker for reboot 
request "/sbin/halt" for console and login managers for GUI is the right 
place to put this on based on the ConsoleKit and PolicyKit's informations.

We already have enough vodooo black magic between pm-utils and HAL, so please, 
please, please, do not introduce another one. Let ConsoleKit act like an 
information provider about users/sessions etc. and others to use it.

S.Çağlar Onur <caglar at>

Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates and an Apache in house!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the hal mailing list