org.freedesktop.PowerManagement version 0.2

[William Jon McCann]

On 4/2/07, David Zeuthen <david at fubar.dk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 23:17 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 18:10 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> > > I agree, and I'd even say that gpm and others shouldn't
> >
> > Shouldn't or should?
>
> Shouldn't....
>
> > > start providing the SM interface as it may be a bit more complicated
> > > than the proposed Shutdown()/Reboot()/Logout() methods (e.g. Lubos
> > > Lunak's comments earlier today).
>
> ... because of the reasons above.
>
> > Jon, what have you spec'ed out so far with GDM?
>
> But gdm can never provide an interface on the D-Bus session bus in a
> desktop session. And it shouldn't - gdm is highly sensitive code so we
> want as few attack vectors as possible. However, gdm can (and already
> does) provide a mechanism that e.g. gnome-session (which should provide
> org.fd.SessionManagement) can use. Hope this clarifies.

Right.  The interface that Dan and I were suggesting would be on the
system bus and essentially just a nicer replacement for the current
socket protocol.  And... offtopic for this thread - sorry.

Jon