Michael Catanzaro

Same for `AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR`. There is a trick: the directory specified in `AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR` and the directories specified by `AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS` should really be ignored if and only if there are not any...

> I miss [documentation for libproxy](https://github.com/libproxy/libproxy/issues/52). There also seems to be no tests in the libproxy project nor does it run any CI jobs. It does not give an impression...

> 2. (bad) **blocking** HTTP/1.1 retriever function (no TLS support) (including a blocking name resolve with its own DNS cache) CVE-2020-25219 is a humorous example of the badness here. Anyway,...

> So the only remaining use-case I see is to spawn temporary dbus sessions for development, testing, containers, etc. I think that's indeed the exact use-case.

> I would kinda expect that package will go away at some point simply because there's no need for it with `dbus-broker` being available. Don't worry, it's not going anywhere,...

> if you could give some example how to use another method would be great Thing is, there really is no replacement for dbus-run-session: that's why this issue report exists....

> I can understand why one would use dbus-launch --autostart, but that does not seem to be the case anywhere, right? So the only remaining use-case I see is to...

> My question was: Why is dbus-run-session not suitable for that use-case? Well it is suitable for that, sure. (Unless you're specifically trying to run tests with dbus-broker.) But then...

Certainly seems like the path of least-resistance. But if so, then we should close this issue, because open issue indicates intent to fix in bubblewrap IMO. ;)

> We are evaluating to rename org.gnome.Evince -> org.gnome.evince. We're trying to standardize GNOME on the former (org.gnome.Evince).