Hi Margot, HAL has been deprecated by the community. Its functionalities have been divided and implemented by several new modules in the community. That's why I do not want to extend HAL.
Regards, Jedy On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 21:01 -0700, Margot Miller wrote: > I thought it was strange that ConsoleKit would have reboot given > that HAL service already has reboot, halt, and suspend. > > Thanks > Margot > > > > Jedy Wang wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 10:37 +0200, Joerg Barfurth wrote: > > > >> Wrt ConsoleKit: I share the concerns that it isn't entirely clear which > >> DBus service should become the single, authoritative service to provide > >> system reboot/shutdown (and suspend, etc) services. These interfaces > >> look a bit out of place on ConsoleKit. > >> > > Hi Joerg, > > > > I think ConsokeKit provides only one DBus service daemon (It's a > > privileged daemon) which is used to check for the > > solaris.system.shutdown authorization. We can extend this service daemon > > to export a few DBus methods to support fast reboot. > > > > For example, ConsoleKit DBus service daemon currently provides 2 DBus > > methods, Stop and Restart, to shutdown and reboot the system. We can add > > 2 new DBus methods, FastRestart and ColdRestart, to support fast reboot > > and reboot to prom. > > > > I do not understand what you mean by "These interfaces look a bit out of > > place on ConsoleKit"? > > > > Regards, > > > > Jedy > > > >> The only reasons I can see for them being there is > >> > >> - ConsoleKit is the place where it is known that a user is 'on the > >> console', i.e. that notion can be more clearly and flexibly expressed by > >> combining the notion of ConsoleKit seats with PolicyKit (or isn't that > >> going away in favor of 'polkit' nowadays?) rules than by using "logged > >> in on '/dev/console'". (How does /dev/console ownership translate in > >> times of VTs?) > >> > >> This would make these interfaces look misplaced in Solaris, as we are > >> not using PolicyKit/polkit for these things (yet?). And it would > >> indicate that ConsoleKit is in the game for checking authorization, but > >> does not imply that it is the proper place to implement the > >> functionality (and all the boot knobs - fast vs. bios, change of BE, etc). > >> > >> - GDM needs them and is based on ConsoleKit. That would make this mere > >> convenience. GDM could easily make use of another service. > >> > >> It would be good to have a longer term architectural vision here, as > >> that would determine how much of this should be exposed by ConsoleKit. > >> And I don't know how much platform-specific interface would be > >> acceptable for ConsoleKit. > >> > >> > >> BTW: Is there any interaction between the gdm user and the 'Console > >> User' status? The gdm user probably should never be considered the > >> console owner, even if a greeter is running on the console. I hope that > >> is the case .... > >> > >> - J?rg > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
