You are right, thanks Chris. The screen saver is disabled there. However, the current architecture/concept is not consistent in itself:
- what for is there an icon, when it doesn't have any effect? - why doesn't clicking the icon start the required programm (gnome-screen-saver) by itself? - why isn't there any feedback about why nothing happens when I tell the computer to do some action (lock the screen) and it doesn't do it? - why is it necessary to occupy virtual memory and CPU cycles with a programm (gnome-screensaver), when the programm doesn't do anything useful during its life? Locking the screen is an active action from the user and thus gnome-screensaver can be startet and stoped when it is not needed? - why does it have an effect to click on the "lock" icon but not any effect to click on the "shutdown" icon and choose "Lock Screen"? ** Changed in: gnome-screensaver (Ubuntu) Status: Invalid => New ** Summary changed: - lock doesn't lock + lock doesn't lock when gnome-screensaver not running in the background -- lock doesn't lock when gnome-screensaver not running in the background https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/509411 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is a bug assignee. -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs