From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35350)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jPwyJ-0007ES-FV
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 19:34:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jPwyJ-00011z-1d
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 19:34:03 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60465)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1jPwyI-00011c-JE
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 19:34:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jPwyI-0008K7-GA
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 19:34:02 -0400
Subject: [bug#40680] [PATCH] service: sddm: Have sddm-service-type conflict
 with other display managers.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.40680.B40680.158725279731937@debbugs.gnu.org>
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
References: <20200417144115.2475-1-efraim@flashner.co.il>
 <87r1wlaku6.fsf@gnu.org> <20200418180121.GA4725@E5400>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 01:33:07 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20200418180121.GA4725@E5400> (Efraim Flashner's message of "Sat,
 18 Apr 2020 21:01:21 +0300")
Message-ID: <87h7xg4bf0.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
Cc: 40680@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi,

Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:

> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:00:49PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:

[...]

>> > --- a/gnu/services/sddm.scm
>> > +++ b/gnu/services/sddm.scm
>> > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ Relogin=3D"              (if (sddm-configuration-r=
elogin? config)
>> >           (documentation "SDDM display manager.")
>> >           (requirement '(user-processes))
>> >           (provision '(display-manager))
>> > +         (conflicts-with '(xorg-server))
>>=20
>> =E2=80=98conflicts-with=E2=80=99 doesn=E2=80=99t exist, right?  :-)
>>=20
>
> I haven't tried it out for Guix services, but it exists for shepherd
> services, according to the manual=C2=B9

Right, it=E2=80=99s not available in Guix <shepherd-service>.

However, simplify adding =E2=80=98xorg-server=E2=80=99 to =E2=80=98provisio=
n=E2=80=99 should have the
desired effect: =E2=80=98guix system=E2=80=99 errors out if more than one s=
ervice
provides the same symbol.

>> But yes, I think (provision '(xorg-server display-manager)) would be
>> fine.
>>=20
>> Or we can even drop =E2=80=98display-manager=E2=80=99 since it=E2=80=99s=
 not used anywhere else.
>
> Normally I'd be skeptical about dropping it since people might expect it
> if they're using sddm, but it'd probably be fine.

Yeah, maybe it=E2=80=99s safer to keep it.

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.