Yes, but also use -f (to follow child processes) and -s 2048 (to increase
the size of strings) and -tt (to get timing).

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Jeff Abrahamson <j...@purple.com> wrote:

> 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
>>
>
>


-- 
Best regards,
Michael

Reply via email to