From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 17 11:13:30 2022 Received: (at 52533) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2022 16:13:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47680 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n9UdO-0002Aj-L8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 11:13:30 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:47560) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n9UdJ-0002AQ-LQ for 52533@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 11:13:29 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56DA154A; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:13:19 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pTY53L4JJ9uJ; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:13:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from ribbon (91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net [91.160.117.201]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55D4BCC; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:13:18 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxim Cournoyer Subject: Re: bug#52533: guix deploy breaks SSH access with a PAM error References: <87czlx88ez.fsf@gmail.com> <87ilvor3sn.fsf@gnu.org> <87r19bom0r.fsf@gnu.org> <87tue77k40.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtjz1t63.fsf@gmail.com> <877daypk8r.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8yijsp6.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 28 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 230 de la =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:13:17 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87v8yijsp6.fsf@gmail.com> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Mon, 17 Jan 2022 10:19:17 -0500") Message-ID: <875yqimjc2.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: hera.aquilenet.fr; none X-Rspamd-Server: hera X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 56DA154A X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.10 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52533 Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 52533@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Hi, Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > > [...] > >> sshd could also be started via socket activation; =E2=80=98sshd=E2=80=99= subprocesses >> corresponding to existing logins would be unaffected. >> >>> Also, it seems to me inetd can already do "socket activation", if this >>> was somehow useful. >> >> Yes, inetd can do that. It would be nicer though to have it all >> integrated in the Shepherd. > > I'm not sure. The beauty of Shepherd, in my eyes, when compared to > other init systems, is that it is lean and clean. Leveraging what's > already out there (and part of GNU) seems an obvious path to me, as it: > > 1. Means less code to write, document and maintain. > 2. Creates more cohesion between various components of the GNU project. Heheh, Guix was started to address #2 actually. Today, I think #2 is okay but should not be an obstacle. As for #1, sure, but Shepherd will need to grow a proper event loop anyway, so socket activation won=E2=80=99t make much of a difference. Also, taking a step back, systemd undoubtedly changed user expectations for the better in terms of integration, monitoring, and logging. Having the same level of integration in the Shepherd would be a step in that direction. >> (Basically, it=E2=80=99s a choice we could make right away: do we move a= ll >> network daemons, plus things like guix-daemon, dbus-daemon, etc. etc. to >> inetd services, or do we instead extend the Shepherd to support socket >> activation? I=E2=80=99m rather in favor of the latter, but if in Guix S= ystem we >> build an abstraction that can equally well target inetd or a future >> Shepherd version, that=E2=80=99s even better.) > > We could start with just targeting inetd, and build the abstraction > later, if the need arises, perhaps? We may never need it. Yes, so what I had in mind is, in Guix System, something like , which would kinda look like but be lowered (for now) to an inetd service. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.