'no_polkit' variant for Gconf (was Re: Inkscape as non-root? (-> gnome-vs -> gconf -> policykit -> fail))

[~suv]

On 28/5/09 18:33, Kevin Reid wrote:
> I run MacPorts as a dedicated non-root non-admin user. Attempting to
> install Inkscape eventually installs policykit, which fails because it
> tries to create a user. What should be changed in order to be able to
> use Inkscape without any users or other administrative changes involved?

My attempts to create a build-environment for Inkscape failed at the
same point as Kevin describes. My local MacPorts is installed as
non-admin, non-root (no sudo if avoidable) with custom prefix and
macports.conf-setting 'no_startupitem').

I could not 'port install '
- gnome-vfs
- libgsf
- librsvg
- libwpd
which all finally have dependencies to gconf and thus policiykit.

AFAIU Inkscape itself has no need for gconf or policykit, they just come
as dependencies with current gnome-vfs and libgsf ports.

To get gnome-vfs and librsvg installed anyway I tried to add a local
Portfile for gconf with a new variant 'no_polkit' - basically forcing
gconf to configure and build without policykit (see attached diff file).

An alternative would have been to create variants for policykit to
adhere to the non-admin setup (like dbus, apache2) and not create a new
user/group when installing the port, but I lack the skills and knowledge
about both MacPorts and Gnome/Gconf/Policykit - so following the lead in
Gconf's Changelog mentioning it to be able to handle a missing policykit
install seemed the easier way for me:

GConf-2.26.2/ChangeLog:
| 2008-08-21  Saleem Abdulrasool  <compnerd at compnerd.org>
|         * configure.in:  Check for polkit-policy-file-validate if
|         policykit is neede to allow configure to pass on systems
|         without PolicyKit

So far I succeeded to build inkscape and bundle it into Inkscape.app,
and received no error messages complaining about missing files or libs
or daemons (from gconf or policiykit) - besides the known issue with
D-Bus for OCAL import.

What are the risks of 'crippling' GConf in this way when I have no needs
for the gnome desktop or whatever it is the essential part of? Any
comments on the attached portfile patch would be highly appreciated -
I'm new to MacPorts and it's my first attempt to build a software the
size of Inkscape myself.

tia, ~suv

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Gconf-Portfile.diff
URL: <http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20090730/be02798b/attachment.ksh>