Sure thing.

Just to be clear, do you mean that instead of launching "i3lock .." I
substitute "strace -o/tmp/i3lock-log-$(date +%s) i3lock ..."?

Jeff Abrahamson
+33 6 24 40 01 57
+44 7920 594 255    <-- only if I'm in the UK

http://jeff.purple.com/
http://blog.purple.com/jeff/

On 17 April 2015 at 09:19, Michael Stapelberg <mich...@i3wm.org> wrote:

> i3lock shouldn’t hang around. Can you start stracing all your i3lock
> instances automatically and provide the corresponding strace output of a
> hung instance in a bugreport?
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Jeff Abrahamson <j...@purple.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a maintenance function that ought not bother spinning the CPU if
>> the screen is locked.  It checks this thus:
>>
>> if pidof i3lock >/dev/null; then
>>     ...
>>
>> This is i3-specific, which is sad, but not a huge problem.  What is a
>> problem is that i3lock sometimes hangs around even though I think it should
>> exit on unlock.  And, indeed, most of the time it does exit on unlock.
>> Once in a while, I find I have one or even several i3lock processes hanging
>> around.
>>
>> I either lock my screen explicitly
>>
>> bindsym $mod+Control+L exec i3lock --dpms --inactivity-timeout 10
>> --color=220022
>>
>> or else it's done by inactivity
>>
>> xautolock -detectsleep \
>>     -time 3 -locker "i3lock --dpms --color=220022 --inactivity-timeout 10
>> --nofork"
>>
>> This question thus has two parts:
>>
>> 1. Am I doing something wrong that I sometimes have multiple i3lock
>> instances?
>> 2. Is there a better way to detect screen lock than pidof i3lock?
>>
>> Jeff Abrahamson
>> +33 6 24 40 01 57
>> +44 7920 594 255    <-- only if I'm in the UK
>>
>> http://jeff.purple.com/
>> http://blog.purple.com/jeff/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Michael
>

Reply via email to