Title: #5766: [WiP] Sources cleanup - part 3.
> > * incorporate "lib secrets" into KCM since there
are no other users
> If you want to touch this, it might be good to investigate if it is still needed.
libsecrets was created to share code between secrets responder and kcm (since first
implementation of kcm talked to secrets via its rest api). It is however affected by the
rest api usage, for example it converts key to urls to dn which is not needed anymore.
Perhaps it would be enough to use sysdb instead and remove libsecrets completely.
Right, once `libsecrets` drops encryption support entirely, it might happen we can just
add some helpers to sysdb instead of `libsecrets`. It's just easier for me to do this
step by step.
> > * to check if `kcm_ops_queue*` layer is still needed (most probably answer is
"no" because only sync backends are now available) and remove it not
> This is questionable. Once you remove secrets backend, we can (and should) convert
all tevent-based api of the backend to sync calls. But perhaps we will need some async
calls in the future as well so it might be beneficial to keep the queue mechanism (or make
it easily revertable).
I can leave this intact.
I worry it adds some latency (but not sure).
It can be removed for sync api, I would just like to be able to reimplement it easily if
it is ever needed again. But perhaps it can be replaced by tevent_queue in which case it
does not matter, I'm not sure.
See the full comment at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/5766#issuecomment-908352571