Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-10 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:33:59PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
 OK, I misunderstood the problem. I thought the difficulty was to fire
 the screensaver on the behalf of the active user. Isn't the information
 about running a power management software available through DBus?

Hmm, that's actually a good point. It seems the X session information is only
needed for old KDE setups. Ah well, consolekit is optional now, so no need to
worry anymore. :)

Michael

-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710070632.ga16...@feivel.credativ.lan



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-09 Thread Michael Meskes
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 09:53:00PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
 Yes, this would send the XF86ScreenSaver which would kick the
 screensaver of the currently displayed X session. This is another
 (imperfect) way to solve the problem of locking the user's screen
 without needing either an entry in /var/run/utmp or consolekit.

But this is not the problem. If it was just the screensaver a hard dependency
wouldn't be needed. After all screensaver itself is only recommended. The
problem we were facing was that acpi-support has to figure out if other power
management software was running before acting itself. And for that the X
session information is needed.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120709080603.ga11...@feivel.credativ.lan



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-09 Thread Vincent Bernat
 ❦  9 juillet 2012 10:06 CEST, Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org :

 Yes, this would send the XF86ScreenSaver which would kick the
 screensaver of the currently displayed X session. This is another
 (imperfect) way to solve the problem of locking the user's screen
 without needing either an entry in /var/run/utmp or consolekit.

 But this is not the problem. If it was just the screensaver a hard dependency
 wouldn't be needed. After all screensaver itself is only recommended. The
 problem we were facing was that acpi-support has to figure out if other power
 management software was running before acting itself. And for that the X
 session information is needed.

OK, I misunderstood the problem. I thought the difficulty was to fire
the screensaver on the behalf of the active user. Isn't the information
about running a power management software available through DBus?
-- 
if (user_specified)
/* Didn't work, but the user is convinced this is the
 * place. */
2.4.0-test2 /usr/src/linux/drivers/parport/parport_pc.c


pgpQQ7MqoSY4J.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-09 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Jul 09, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:

 OK, I misunderstood the problem. I thought the difficulty was to fire
 the screensaver on the behalf of the active user. Isn't the information
 about running a power management software available through DBus?
The whole point of this discussion indeed is to not force consolekit, 
dbus and their dependencies on servers, which tipically do not have X.
I greatly appreciate that the maintainer too the time to fix this.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-08 Thread Vincent Bernat
 ❦  7 juillet 2012 20:38 CEST, Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org :

 The bug is already closed but I'd like to share another solution: I am
 using acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE which sends XF86ScreenSaver key to the
 currently displayed X server. This is not foolproof (only one X server,
 only if it is currently displayed) but it is far simpler than other
 solutions.

 Sorry, but what is acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE supposed to accomplish? Sending
 XF86ScreenSaver key? I don't really how this relates to this big report. Could
 you please explain?

Yes, this would send the XF86ScreenSaver which would kick the
screensaver of the currently displayed X session. This is another
(imperfect) way to solve the problem of locking the user's screen
without needing either an entry in /var/run/utmp or consolekit.
-- 
Use self-identifying input.  Allow defaults.  Echo both on output.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan  Plauger)


pgpRBMGfoS9fD.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-07 Thread Michael Meskes
On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 01:29:39AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
 The bug is already closed but I'd like to share another solution: I am
 using acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE which sends XF86ScreenSaver key to the
 currently displayed X server. This is not foolproof (only one X server,
 only if it is currently displayed) but it is far simpler than other
 solutions.

Sorry, but what is acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE supposed to accomplish? Sending
XF86ScreenSaver key? I don't really how this relates to this big report. Could
you please explain?

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120707183828.ga13...@feivel.credativ.lan



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-07-06 Thread Vincent Bernat
 ❦ 26 juin 2012 14:48 CEST, Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org :

 I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
 happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
 acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.

 I'm not sure I like the attitude here. If that gets closed again sounds like
 I was closing the bug without a reason, which I didn't. I'm absolutely willing
 to listen to ideas of solving this, which imo would be a much better solution
 than creating an additional package that will only partly work. But please 
 don't
 forget that upstream started using consolekit for a reason. 

The bug is already closed but I'd like to share another solution: I am
using acpi_fakekey $KEY_COFFEE which sends XF86ScreenSaver key to the
currently displayed X server. This is not foolproof (only one X server,
only if it is currently displayed) but it is far simpler than other
solutions.
-- 
Don't stop with your first draft.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan  Plauger)


pgpHazP7UuTUH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-27 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org [120626 14:48]:
[ Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org [120626 12:05]:]
  I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
  happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
  acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.

 [...] I'm absolutely willing
 to listen to ideas of solving this, which imo would be a much better solution
 than creating an additional package that will only partly work. [...]

I'd prefer to get this fixed in acpi-support-base, but I think you
have made your point very clear that the only purpose of that package is
to not do anything if some power manager is running and that to detect this
perfectly you are totally willing to force anyone to install consolekit
(and thus dbus) who justs wants his system shutting down cleanly when the
power button is pressed. That this is not issue for you at all and that
you do not see any problem in introducing this change 2012-06-21 i.e.
shortly before the freeze.

 If that gets closed again sounds like I was closing the bug without
 a reason, which I didn't.

That sentence was much more neutral than anything I think I could have
written. After you were closing two bug reports by just dismissing the
issue, a if that gets closed again is a totally objective way to
describe expectations.

Bernhard R. Link


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120627093253.ga3...@client.brlink.eu



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-27 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Jun 27, Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org wrote:

 I'd prefer to get this fixed in acpi-support-base, but I think you
 have made your point very clear that the only purpose of that package is
 to not do anything if some power manager is running and that to detect this
 perfectly you are totally willing to force anyone to install consolekit
 (and thus dbus) who justs wants his system shutting down cleanly when the
 power button is pressed. That this is not issue for you at all and that
 you do not see any problem in introducing this change 2012-06-21 i.e.
 shortly before the freeze.
Agreed. The consolekit dependencies are unacceptable for headless 
servers where you just want the ACPI power button event to work.
If fixing acpi-support-base is hard then acpi-support-minimal or 
acpi-support-server would be just as good.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-26 Thread Bernhard R. Link
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org

Package name: acpi-support-minimal
License : GPL2+
Description: minimal scripts for handling base ACPI events
 This package contains minimal scripts to react to various base
 ACPI events such as the power button. It does not require any
 other daemons but acpid. For a less minimal version, install
 the acpi-support-base or acpi-support packages.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120626085241.ga4...@client.brlink.eu



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-26 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi!

On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 10:52:48 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
 Package: wnpp
 Severity: wishlist
 Owner: Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org
 
 Package name: acpi-support-minimal
 License : GPL2+
 Description: minimal scripts for handling base ACPI events
  This package contains minimal scripts to react to various base
  ACPI events such as the power button. It does not require any
  other daemons but acpid. For a less minimal version, install
  the acpi-support-base or acpi-support packages.

I'm guessing this is due to the introduction of the consolekit
hard dependency. I was meaning to reply to 665987 with more info,
but that slipped my mind, and I see now that you filed 678524 too.

I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.

thanks,
guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120626100449.ga11...@gaara.hadrons.org



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-26 Thread Michael Meskes
 I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
 happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
 acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.

I'm not sure I like the attitude here. If that gets closed again sounds like
I was closing the bug without a reason, which I didn't. I'm absolutely willing
to listen to ideas of solving this, which imo would be a much better solution
than creating an additional package that will only partly work. But please don't
forget that upstream started using consolekit for a reason. 

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120626124810.ga24...@feivel.credativ.lan



Re: Bug#679078: ITP: acpi-support-minimal -- minimal acpi scripts

2012-06-26 Thread Guillem Jover
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 14:48:10 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
  I'll be reopening 665987, but if that gets closed again I'd be very
  happy to switch to acpi-support-minimal from my now locally built
  acpi-support packages w/ the consolekit dependency removed.
 
 I'm not sure I like the attitude here. If that gets closed again
 sounds like I was closing the bug without a reason, which I didn't.

Sure! It was not my intention to make it sound like you closed it w/o
reason; given the comment on the previous paragraph stating that I
didn't reply to the bug report, I thought that would be clear. I guess
not. :)

 I'm absolutely willing to listen to ideas of solving this, which imo
 would be a much better solution than creating an additional package
 that will only partly work. But please don't forget that upstream
 started using consolekit for a reason.

I agree that coming up with a working solution that works for everyone
would be perfect. The comment about the bug being closed again was only
referring to the possibility that you, as the maintainer, could not be
convinced, which would be completely respectable, and in such case
because we'd still disagree there's other options for us; removing the
packages, switching to something else, or keep forking them locally to
remove the dependency, but if Bernhard is willing to maintain such
fork inside or outside Debian, then all the better. OTOH taking this
for example to the tech-ctte would *not* be an option, because I've
never considered that to be a reasonable solution to anything.

I'll follow up on the acpi-support bug report.

thanks,
guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120626143107.ga20...@gaara.hadrons.org