[PATCH] Update xflock4 (Bug 10217) again
rob at manjaro.org
Fri Mar 20 00:21:28 CET 2015
On 19/03/15 19:55, Alexander Mezin wrote:
> 2015-03-19 14:06 GMT+06:00 Guido Berhoerster <gber at opensuse.org>:
>> * Alexander Mezin <mezin.alexander at gmail.com> [2015-03-18 21:30]:
>>> Based on patch by Jarno Suni.
>>> - Use pgrep instead of pidof, which is, hopefully, available
>>> - Check screensavers running under current uid only.
>> Process names are never a reliable way to check for the
>> screensaver running in the currently active session even if you
>> restrict it to a user. See comment #22 on that bug for the way
> But it's still better than current xflock4.
> Maybe merge this patch for now, and replace with something better later?
> With current state of Xfce 4.12, I can configure light-locker's
> settings from GUI, but the locking itself doesn't work. Isn't it
Just want to voice support here from Manjaro devs and community for
I understand that a better system for screen locking is desired rather
than the current way the xflock4 script works, but i don't see this as a
good reason to not accept patches that improve the situation now, even
if they don't make the situation completely optimal or final.
For Manjaro we've been modifying the xflock4 script to support
light-locker for some time now.
My original pull request relating to this is here:
...but i recently closed it and opened a new one that is only
light-locker support (not also LightDM's 'dm-tool' support):
Xubuntu and Manjaro are 2 of the more popular Xfce platforms and AFAIK
both use LightDM and Light-Locker. It would really be nice if there was
upstream support for them.
More information about the Xfce4-dev