PolicyKit-authentication-agents in Fedora

Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com
Fri Apr 9 00:01:46 UTC 2010

On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 01:53 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 08.04.2010, 19:05 -0400 schrieb Tony Nelson:
> > On 10-04-08 14:13:01, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> [snipped]
> > > I never said it is a useful decision rationale, it's something we
> > > cannot avoid. I agree it's not useful, but please address your 
> > > complainants to the yum developers.
> >  ...
> > 
> > Would it work to change the name to "polkit-lxpolkit" and have it 
> > Provide lxpolkit?
> Then polkit-kde would win and it has even more deps. ;)
> Not sure if we should change the name from what upstream uses. IMO first
> of all yum's depsolver should be enhanced. Matthias already made an
> important point here.
> Regards,
> Christoph
> P.S. /me wonders what would happen if we had polkit-gtk and polkit-kde
> with the same provides and the same length of the name..

Part of the solution here is to not rely entirely on yum depsolving, and
instead add explicitly which polkit you want in the comps group, so that
a provider is already selected.  Yum won't select an additional one.
This is what we should do for critpath as well, mark the gnome policy
kit explicitly as part of the critpath.

Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100408/dc1f1d68/attachment.bin 

More information about the devel mailing list