[Sugar-devel] [PATCH sugar] Create a default unencrypted keyring, OLPC #10290

[Peter Robinson]

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Sascha Silbe
<silbe at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Simon Schampijer's message of 2012-04-16 12:33:05 +0200:
>
>> This patch does create an ununcrypted default keyring
>> if there is not one available already. This will stop
>> prompts for unlocking the keyring after logging into
>> Sugar.
>>
>> In GNOME the session manager deals with creating
>> that keyring. In the OLPC images we do create a default
>> keyring on image creation time (see olpc-configure), same
>> is true for Soas. This patch does check/create the
>> keyring on every Sugar run. The advantage is that
>> for example installs the live image to a disk install
>> using liveinst, or install Sugar from the Fedora installer
>> without installing or ever running GNOME that workaround
>> will work for them as well.
>
> At least the patch description is too downstream-centric for my
> taste. It also looks like something the distro X session scripts should
> do, not sugar. It may be fine to include in sugar-emulator, because
> we're setting up the X session manually there, without calling the
> distro X session scripts.

It should work fine on all distros and releases, the whole reason I
did the patch is to fix issues not on the XO.

> IIRC, somebody mentioned (on IRC?) that this functionality is also
> included in gnome-session. Replacing our ancient embedded copy of
> gnome-session in sugar-toolkit with using upstream gnome-session would
> do the trick as well then. I've been working with upstream on that for
> some time. gnome-session can now properly run non-default (read
> non-Gnome) sessions [1] and I have working sugar [2] and sugar-toolkit
> [3] patches to make use of that facility. The only reason I've not
> posted it for upstream (Sugar) inclusion is that gnome-session doesn't
> provide API for Sugar to trigger Shutdown and Reboot without presenting
> non-Sugar UI [4]. With the systemd support patch that landed recently
> (99bb52c [5]), this hurdle is gone at least on systemd based systems
> (i.e. Fedora).

I believe it is, ultimately if/when we move to that the whole start up
will have to be re-written which is a bit to big for this cycle, I
don't see the issues with including this in the interim.

Peter