Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by onli on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @10:04AM (#15081611)

That sounds reasonable. I'm very surprised. Disabling remote targets, ignoring SELinux, focusing on reliability.

DBus is the one part of the modern linux desktop I would like to/have to install to get the applications I want running, even though I dislike it a lot (pulseaudio and systemd one can just not install). One example is the password remember function of steam. Having a more reasonable implementation could help with this a lot.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by tomegun on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @10:11AM (#15081662)

For the record: dbus-broker has full SELinux support.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by onli on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @10:21AM (#15081726)

Well, I don't mind either way. https://github.com/bus1/dbus-broker/wiki#using-dbus-broker says it has to be disabled.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by tomegun on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @10:27AM (#15081767)

Indeed, thanks for the pointer! Removed that now (it was left-over from before we got SELinux support).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by pinpeliponni on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @11:01AM (#15082002)

Hmm. If it doesn't have SELinux policy that actually does something, it probably shouldn't run as a daemon. Let's see how I can remove it... :(

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus by tomegun on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @11:38AM (#15082351)

Not sure what you mean here. dbus-broker(1) supports SELinux exactly to the same extent as dbus-daemon(1) does. Also; remove what?

[ Parent | on HN ]