On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 19:49 -0600, Daniele Nicolodi wrote: > On 25/10/2019 14:31, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > Any update on dbus-broker? If you are looking for a sponsor, I am > > willing to help. > > Hello Luca, > > my work on dbus-broker stalled a while ago. The package is functional > but there was consensus that adding it to the archive required major > restructuring of how systemd user instance services are activated, > requiring patches for init-system-helpers and debhelper. > Unfortunately > it took me 4 months to have those patches reviewed. After that I > didn't > have time to dedicate to this little project. > > To bring dbus-broker into the archive it is at least necessary to > update > the package to the latest upstream release, update the package to > make > use of the added functionality in debhelper (dh_installsystemduser). > That's probably not very difficult to do. > > In the long run, it would probably be necessary to coordinate with > the > dbus maintainers on the best way forward for splitting the dbus > package > into smaller pieces so that dbus-broker would not have to > (transitively) > depend on dbus-deamon. > > I am still interested in working on this but I don't have much free > time > at the moment and I prefer to work on more rewarding things. Seeing > that > there is some interest in seeing dbus-broker in Debian may be enough > of > an incentive to work again on this, but I cannot promise anything. > > The current status of the package is here: > > https://salsa.debian.org/dnn-guest/dbus-broker > > > Cheers, > Dan
Thank you for your work on this! Is it supported to have the system bus handled by -broker and sessions buses handled by -daemon? If it is, we could start with what's already working, and only upload to ustable (blocking migration to bullseye) with system bus support, and dependency on -daemon for the tools. And then iterate from there. What do you think? -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
