Re: Wheel group as polkit admins

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Leo,

Leo Prikler <address@hidden> skribis:

> Since our polkit service expects a list of packages as extension, I
> currently use the following in my /etc/config.scm:
>
> (define polkit-wheel
>   (package
>    (name "polkit-wheel")
>    (version "0")
>    (source #f)
>    (build-system trivial-build-system)
>    (arguments
>     `(#:modules ((guix build utils))
>       #:builder
>       (begin
>         (use-modules ((guix build utils)))
>         (let ((rules.d (string-append %output "/share/polkit-
> 1/rules.d")))
>           (mkdir-p rules.d)
>           (with-output-to-file (string-append rules.d "/wheel.rules")
>             (lambda ()
>               (display "polkit.addAdminRule(function(action, subject) {
>     return [\"unix-group:wheel\"];
> });
> ")))))))
>    (home-page #f)
>    (synopsis "Make wheel adminstrate")
>    (description #f)
>    (license #f)))
>
> (define polkit-wheel-service-type
>   (service-type (name 'polkit-wheel)
>                 (extensions
>                  (list (service-extension polkit-service-type
>                                           (const (list polkit-
> wheel)))))
>                 (default-value '())))
>
> The problems with this apporach should be clear.  "polkit-wheel" is by
> no stretch of the imagination an actual package.  It is so trivial,
> that it might as well just be a file.  Is there a simpler way of
> extending polkit, perhaps with just a g-expression?

Yup, I think you could make it a ‘computed-file’ instead of a package:

  (computed-file "polkit-wheel-rule"
                 (with-imported-modules '((guix build utils))
                   #~(begin …)))

Should we make that the default, BTW?  It would seem to make sense as
that’s the whole point of the “wheel” group.

What do people think?

Thanks,
Ludo’.