GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 743508
polkitd fails to start: patch for gio/gcredentialsprivate.h
Last modified: 2015-02-02 13:03:15 UTC
Created attachment 295415 [details] [review] patch to fix authentication problem OS: DragonFlyBSD Overview: polkitd fails to start as a dbus service. Steps to reproduce: Start system dbus, start hald. Actual result: dbus fails to activate polkitd. Expected result: dbus should have successfully activated polkitd. Cause: The issue originates in the missing support for DragonFly in the credentials passing mechanism of GDBus in GIO. The patch attached fixes the problem: it gives DragonFly the same status that FreeBSD has in that DragonFly will use the same mechanism that FreeBSD does. It is tested and works.
Review of attachment 295415 [details] [review]: thanks for the patch. could you please attach a patch generated through `git format-patch`? it makes it easier to apply it, and to credit your work properly. ::: gio/gcredentialsprivate.h.orig @@ +40,3 @@ #define G_CREDENTIALS_SPOOFING_SUPPORTED 1 +#elif defined(__DragonFly__) instead of duplicating everything, could you please add `defined (__DragonFly__)` to the list above, i.e.: #elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__) || defined(__GNU__) || defined(__DragonFly__)
Created attachment 295498 [details] [review] git formatted patch Thanks, git formatted patch attached.
Review of attachment 295498 [details] [review]: thanks! I think the patch looks good, but I'll wait for another GLib developer to comment. now would be a great time to look at GLib's policy for platform support on the wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GLib/SupportedPlatforms if the DragonFly project could set up a continuous build of GLib, or at least set up a test plan to avoid future regressions, it would be stellar.
yeah, looks good
Thanks again. DragonFly builds packages including glib on a weekly (or so) basis, see e.g. here for the (current) release http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/dports/dragonfly:4.0:x86:64/LATEST/All/ jhbuild sounds interesting, we might look into this as well. Question: will this patch make into glib 2.43 and newer as well? At least at the moment I did not see it in the 2.43 tree.
(In reply to comment #5) > Question: will this patch make into glib 2.43 and newer as well? At least at > the moment I did not see it in the 2.43 tree. It's *only* in 2.43 / git master. Note that I committed a second patch after yours, so it doesn't look exactly the same as after your commit.
Cool, thanks!