Subject: bug#52533: guix deploy breaks SSH access with a PAM error

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 12:27:41 +0100

Hello,

Maxim Cournoyer <[email-masked]> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>>> 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.
>
> I personally still think the idea is more than "okay"; I see value in
> it; one of the obvious benefits is documentation; most GNU packages come
> with Texinfo documentation, which makes for a nice, integrated
> experience.  I also think that as the system becomes more established
> and integrate more of GNU, more GNU packages maintainers may be
> interested in joining and contributing (reaching some critical mass).

Heheh.  :-)

>> As for #1, sure, but Shepherd will need to grow a proper event loop
>> anyway, so socket activation won’t make much of a difference.
>
> If we keep it dumb and use inetd, it wouldn't, right?

It will get that, independent of socket activation.

> From what I understand, systemd uses socket activation as a means to
> chain events, while inetd is typically used to delay a service
> starting to save on resources such as RAM (for services seldom used).
> Is my primitive understanding about right?

Yes.  In most cases, it’s about starting services lazily (much like the
Hurd’s passive translators, too.)

Thanks,
Ludo’.