There should be somthing like policykit-gnome for xfce. At the moment you just can allow or disallow actions for user, but not ask for authentication. And no, policykit-gnome won't do the job, because it depends on gconf and that is what I do not want on my computer, since it is far worse than windows registry...
What exactly does policykit-gnome do? I'm not sure any Xfce dev has knowledge about policykit stuff (nor really want to have any :) ).
it simply provides dialogs for the different auth_* methods. http://hal.freedesktop.org/docs/PolicyKit/PolicyKit.conf.5.html And there is a wishlist item for xconf for editing Policykit settings, which is not now rejected... PolicyKit is a lot easier to handle than all the hal stuff to finegrain access...
(In reply to comment #1) > What exactly does policykit-gnome do? I'm not sure any Xfce dev has knowledge > about policykit stuff (nor really want to have any :) ). I played a bit with PolicyKit when i had the idea to write a desktop frontend of the system tools backend, in order to authenticate the user the service policykit-gnome is the simplest choice, but it has gnome dependencies (gnome-vfs+gconf), which normally i like avoid. Anyway the author of Policykit (David Zeuten) is currently re-writing this tool and it will be with a complete new API, so i decided to wait a bit, for even thinking about writing a policykit-xfce or porting the gnome one to Xfce.
We should help with policykit-gnome, or accept the gconf dependency.
Moving invalid bugs to the /dev/null product.
(In reply to comment #5) > Moving invalid bugs to the /dev/null product. I really don't understand why this is closed as invalid? at some point there should be a policykit-xfce support, either a copy with, no gnome dependency, of policykit-gnome or just as you said accepting gnome dependency which something i dislike with most of Xfce users/developers i guess.
Yes, this does need to be worked on at some point. Honestly I'd suggest forking policykit-gnome, and make the gnome deps optional, and replaceable with xfce deps. If we can get that working ok, maybe we can upstream the patches such that you could configure with something like "--with-desktop=gnome" or "--with-desktop=xfce" and it'll do the right thing. If they don't want to accept the patches, we could still do that, and release it as policykit-gtk. If we provide value, distros might ship that instead. But it'll be several months at least before I'll have time to even think about looking into this, let alone actually doing it, so someone else might want to take this. (Not sure where to file this in the new bug layout...)
Yeah there is not really a place for this kinda stuff, I think we should leave it out of bugzilla too, since it's not a bug.
Maybe an “enhancement” against an Xfce metapackage (or yes, general)
Or just on the wiki's wishlist page.
We could add a general product again and only allow the editgroups group to create bugs in it, but I think we shouldn't and put unrelated stuff in the wiki and keep bugzilla for bugs against real code. This way there is always someone who is responsible and we don't loose bugs.
http://blog.lxde.org/?p=674 might be intresting if anyone decides to take up on this, lxde came up with lxpolkit
Close bugs in products that are not active anymore.