Use a dbus service name as its app_id #921
Conversation
Also decode the unit name for dbus services and offer to the implementation for some extra context of what is going on.
|
I've tested this to run fine on dbus-broker, I'm not sure it works alright with dbus-daemon. It's still something that should be addressed on the daemon itself. |
|
I wonder if dbus-broker should use the app prefix if there is a corresponding desktop file. The dbus prefixed name seems like an implementation detail we should probably not rely on. |
|
I'm not sure, do you know who should be asked? I keep going back-and-forth on this though. I think that ideally it should be the full .service filename, as in As is, it's not giving us much information anyway. |
|
|
||
| g_assert (g_str_has_prefix (unit, "dbus-")); | ||
|
|
||
| // Parses a unit name such as dbus-:[email protected] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This naming convention for systemd units is specific to dbus-broker.
On systems that have systemd activation available, the reference implementation (dbus-daemon) does not guarantee that activated services are in any sort of systemd service or scope: D-Bus services with SystemdService=foo.service are run as foo.service (probably also true for dbus-broker), and D-Bus services without SystemdService are run via "traditional activation", mechanically the same as what happens on non-systemd systems like *BSD or Devuan, so they end up as child processes in dbus.service (this behaviour is unlike dbus-broker).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Having said that, if a unit name matches this pattern then you can probably be quite confident that it's named according to how dbus-broker does it.
| } | ||
| else | ||
| { | ||
| g_warning("Failed to parse dbus name %s", unit); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will warn on some entirely legitimate unit names. There is a weak convention that a D-Bus service with Name=com.example.Whatever often has SystemdService=dbus-com.example.Whatever.service, which starts with dbus- but does not match dbus-broker's pattern.
I don't know of any concrete examples of user services (session bus services) doing this, but systemd's own dbus-org.freedesktop.login1.service and friends use this pattern for their system services (system bus services).
|
@aleixpol Could you please rebase this pull request? |
|
I still believe that we should fix this in dbus-broker instead of adding more non-standard cgroup naming schemes. |
GeorgesStavracas
added
enhancement
needs discussion
|
I'm poking dbus-broker upstream again to see if we can move forward with changing the naming scheme for transient units. |
Also decode the unit name for dbus services and offer to the implementation for some extra context of what is going on.