+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #35750 +++ On Bug #35750, Will wrote: > > I think that would be nice (in the future) to index > > activation->pending_activations on the name of the .service file, not on the > > bus name: then one .service file could list n service names and guarantee that > > it'll be run at most once at a time. and I replied: > I disagree on the specific mechanics for this: on the session bus, > best-practice (iirc) is for the .service file to be named after the bus > name, and on the system bus, it's mandatory for the name to be the same. I > believe the reason is something to do with the setuid helper. > > One way to get the same effect would be to introduce a way for the "aliases" > to omit the Exec= and say "InsteadActivate=com.example.RealName". Another > would be to introduce a way for ...RealName.service file to say > "AlsoActivateFor=com.example.Alias;com.example.Pseudonym;" or something. In > either case, we'd want to only invoke the setuid system-bus helper for > ...RealName, and track pending activations in terms of ...RealName. > > I believe we used to do something similar for Mission Control (the reference > implementation of the Telepathy AccountManager and ChannelDispatcher > services) on Maemo, where ...AccountManager.service and > ...ChannelDispatcher.service used dbus-send to send Ping to > ...MissionControl5, and ...MissionControl5.service did the actual launching? This has been brought up again in a recent mailing list thread, where I said basically the same thing.
-- GitLab Migration Automatic Message -- This bug has been migrated to freedesktop.org's GitLab instance and has been closed from further activity. You can subscribe and participate further through the new bug through this link to our GitLab instance: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/dbus/dbus/issues/80.
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.