bug#66339: [PATCH gnome-team v3] gnu: dbus-service: make the session available under /run/dbus

[Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>]

Am Mittwoch, dem 04.10.2023 um 12:47 +0200 schrieb Vivien Kraus:
> According to
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/merge_requests/3101, glib
> now searches for the session bus socket in runstatedir. The dbus
> service must
> thus have its socket in /run/dbus.
> 
> For interoperability with the dbus standard, /run/dbus is also
> symlinked to
> /var/run/dbus.
> 
> * gnu/services/dbus.scm (dbus-activation): Symlink /run/dbus to
> /var/run/dbus.
> (%dbus-accounts): Run dbus in /run/dbus.
> (dbus-root-service-type): Save the pid file in /run/dbus.
> ---
> 
> Le jeudi 05 octobre 2023 à 06:41 +0200, Liliana Marie Prikler a écrit
> :
> > > I’m still concerned about doing a symlink in the activation
> > > function.
> > > What if we activate a new system from an existing one? Won’t the
> > > symlink
> > > fail? I think we should preemptively delete /var/run/dbus and
> > > make a new
> > > symlink every time. But I could be wrong, maybe this is not
> > > needed.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > If we go this route, I think we should first check whether
> > /var/run/dbus is indeed a symlink to /run/dbus and move the
> > existing files if not before deleting the directory and creating
> > the symlink.  But before that, we should try to symlink, which will
> > fail with EEXIST if the file already exists, regardless of whether
> > it's a symlink – thereafter you can check the cause of this failure
> > through lstat.
> 
> I changed my mind! I now think it is OK for the system reconfigure to
> fail if a different symlink already exists.
Perhaps, but it's not okay to fail if it's a regular directory.  We
should move those!


Cheers