Rebuild accountsservice

[donald]

This is a mitigation to a yet unresolved nic problem with
OptiPlex 990 workstations. If we have a local passwd, the
accountsservice daemon will query shadow.byname over udp
for each account. Because of the network problem, we
sometimes loose packets and run into rpc timeouts, which are
not properly handled and prevent gdm to display the login
window.

Avoid this mess by disabling the loading of user information.
We don't need it, because we don't present a list of users to
pick from anyway.

[donald]

@anybody: Please test whether this works. I didn't, because I need to stay at home for some time today.

[david]

tested on hmmjaaeh
and the gdm login screen came immediately

[thomas]

crispy patch :)

[pmenzel]

Remember to update with sudo bee update -f accaccountsservice-0.6.13-1.

Also Rebuild accountsservice is not a very useful branch and merge/pull request name in my opinion. do-not-load-user-information or something similar is more useful.

[thomas]

Yes and please dont change the branch name now, caus i'm getting tired of pressing the reload button every 2 minutes :)

[pmenzel]

@thomas, as often I am having a hard time to understand what you want to say and what you are doing.

[pmenzel]

Side note: Also I pushed the update to AccountsService 0.6.45 branch, but as systemd/libsystemd integration(?) had to be disabled due to our old systemd 27 version (systemd 18x required) no systemd service file is installed. I still need to clean that up.

[thomas]

What I'm doing -- following the info and conversation on this topic ...
And when the comits are reorded while you are looking at one - github quarrels, and i need to reload the page, what is a bit annoying.

[thomas]

ogunmakin:
gdm login screen comes subito...

[donald]

I'm not sure, whether we need more verbatim branch names. Its redundant information of what is in the commits. Plus the pull request title will go into the merge commit message (which could be better in this case). And, for example, if you put version numbers into the branch names, you need to rename the branches when version numbers change before the merge (as happened to add-linux-4.9.68 -> add-linux-4.9.70).

After the merge the branch should be deleted from github (I do that regularly) and I use git fetch --prune from time to time to clean up my local copy. So the name is volatile anyway. It will only persist in the merge commit message where you have the pull request tile.

That said, I'm going to rename the branch to "accountsservice-do-not-load-user-information" and update the tile, because I don't really care.

[pmenzel]

Am 20.12.2017 um 10:23 schrieb Donald Buczek:

I'm not sure, whether we need more verbatim branch names. Its redundant information of what is in the commits. Plus the pull request title will go into the merge commit message (which could be better in this case). And, for example, if you put version numbers into the branch names, you need to rename the branches when version numbers change before the merge (as happened to add-linux-4.9.68 -> add-linux-4.9.70). After the merge the branch should be deleted from github (I do that regularly) and I use `git fetch --prune` from time to time to clean up my local copy. So the name is volatile anyway. It will only persist in the merge commit message where you have the pull request title.

My complaint was mainly about the merge/pull request title. That said, if you use a verbatim branch name right away, GitHub will deduce the merge/pull request title from it, so you can name the branch correctly™ and profit when creating the merge/pull request. ;-) Secondly, doing `git remote update` and seeing the remote branches being fetched, it’s useful to not look through the commits of each branch to know what it’s about.

That said, I'm going to rename the branch to "accountsservice-do-not-load-user-information" and update the title, because I don't really care.

Thank you for updating the title.