> I haven't tested it, but it seems like a valid bandaid. Should be
> cleaned with upstream, of course. You should test against < 500,
> though. [1]
Ah, thanks for the pointer.
> Actually I rather thought about making cron sessions not start
> consolekit sessions in the first place, since otherwise you'd still
> have that problem with user cronjobs, wouldn't you?
That would certainly be better I think. I'm just not sure how to do it.
My understanding is that currently we have
cron -> pam -> pam-ck-connector in common-session -> ck session
We can't have cron bypass pam, so we either need it to miss out pam-ck-connector,
or pam-ck-connector to ignore cron. My PAM knowledge is too weak to know
if either of these is possible or how we would go about it.
> I haven't tested it, but it seems like a valid bandaid. Should be
> cleaned with upstream, of course. You should test against < 500,
> though. [1]
Ah, thanks for the pointer.
> Actually I rather thought about making cron sessions not start
> consolekit sessions in the first place, since otherwise you'd still
> have that problem with user cronjobs, wouldn't you?
That would certainly be better I think. I'm just not sure how to do it.
My understanding is that currently we have
cron -> pam -> pam-ck-connector in common-session -> ck session
We can't have cron bypass pam, so we either need it to miss out pam-ck-connector,
or pam-ck-connector to ignore cron. My PAM knowledge is too weak to know
if either of these is possible or how we would go about it.
Thanks,
James