On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:33:59PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OK, I misunderstood the problem. I thought the difficulty was to fire
> the screensaver on the behalf of the active user. Isn't the information
> about running a power management software available through DBus?
Hmm, that's actually
❦ 9 juillet 2012 10:06 CEST, Michael Meskes :
>> Yes, this would send the XF86ScreenSaver which would kick the
>> screensaver of the currently displayed X session. This is another
>> (imperfect) way to solve the problem of locking the user's screen
>> without needing either an entry in /var/run
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 09:53:00PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Yes, this would send the XF86ScreenSaver which would kick the
> screensaver of the currently displayed X session. This is another
> (imperfect) way to solve the problem of locking the user's screen
> without needing either an entry i
❦ 7 juillet 2012 20:38 CEST, Michael Meskes :
>> The bug is already closed but I'd like to share another solution: I am
>> using "acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE" which sends XF86ScreenSaver key to the
>> currently displayed X server. This is not foolproof (only one X server,
>> only if it is currentl
On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 01:29:39AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> The bug is already closed but I'd like to share another solution: I am
> using "acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE" which sends XF86ScreenSaver key to the
> currently displayed X server. This is not foolproof (only one X server,
> only if it i
❦ 26 juin 2012 14:48 CEST, Michael Meskes :
>> I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
>> happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
>> acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.
>
> I'm not sure I like the attitude here. "If th
On Jun 27, "Bernhard R. Link" wrote:
> I'd prefer to get this fixed in acpi-support-base, but I think you
> have made your point very clear that the only purpose of that package is
> to not do anything if some power manager is running and that to detect this
> perfectly you are totally willing to
* Michael Meskes [120626 14:48]:
[ Guillem Jover [120626 12:05]:]
> > I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
> > happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
> > acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.
> [...] I'm absolutely w
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 14:48:10 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
> > happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
> > acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.
>
> I'm not sure I like the atti
> I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
> happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
> acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.
I'm not sure I like the attitude here. "If that gets closed again" sounds like
I was closing the b
Hi!
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 10:52:48 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: "Bernhard R. Link"
>
> Package name: acpi-support-minimal
> License : GPL2+
> Description: minimal scripts for handling base ACPI events
> This package contains minimal sc
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Bernhard R. Link"
Package name: acpi-support-minimal
License : GPL2+
Description: minimal scripts for handling base ACPI events
This package contains minimal scripts to react to various base
ACPI events such as the power button. It does not r
12 matches
Mail list logo
