https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=457859
--- Comment #14 from Oded Arbel <o...@geek.co.il> --- (In reply to Natalie Clarius from comment #13) > > If the user wants to just inhibit the lid close action, then they should > > inhibit "handle-lid-switch". ... > > There is no user-facing setting for this though. There is - it is `systemd-inhibit --what:handle-lid-switch` or possibly I didn't understand what specifically you have talked about. > This seems like a bit of a corner case to me: [...] > Imo, the slight inconvenience of having to keep the laptop open in this > scenario is outweighed by the effects that blocking sleep unconditionally > would have. [...] I think this is the entire point of the "handle-lid-switch" inhibit action is to inhibit handling of the lid switch - it doesn't matter if you think it is a bad idea, if the user has specifically told you that this is what they want to do, using the API they have for doing that, and all other systems respect that (e.g. systemd, or - I'm going to say without actually testing - GNOME) - then PowerDevil should also respect that. > As for https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=457859#c2; sleep inhibitions not > being respected on lid close would be a different issue and best discussed > in a separate bug report. Granted - I'll go open a different ticket for the lid switch inhibition support, and I will consider this ticket as "RESOLVED WORKSFORME" - though its not my ticket to close and there are maintainers around now, so I'll keep my greedy little paws off of the status selector ;-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
