https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10217
--- Comment #21 from Guido Berhoerster <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Eric Koegel from comment #20) > You're right (as always). pgrep might be a better tool than pidof, > availability-wise. I don't think it can be reliably implemented via the process list. It is also does not seem necessary for the current cases since it is possible to query whether a screensaver is running via xscreensaver-command -v, {gnome,mate,cinnamon}-screensaver-command --query, and LightDM can be queried via DBus. > If we go the xfconf route we can have xfpm use it if there's a value set. > That way there aren't different settings everywhere. I know Simon had some > ideas for locking he wrote down in the xfpm roadmap (under the 1.6 or later > section) https://wiki.xfce.org/design/power-manager So if we come up with > something better that would be great. The proposal looks reasonable, you could ship some presets (similar to the preferred applications setting) and detect the running screensaver via the heuristics mentioned above or the availability of known lock commands in case no daemon is running. However, I'd personally favor something even more simple, i.e. just a free-form text entry for the locking command corresponding to a xfconf string. In the vast majority of use-cases a distributor or sysadmin will preinstall a preferred screensaver and the corresponding locking command can then be easily preconfigured via system-wide xfconf default setting. In case a user later consciously switches to a different screensaver, I think he probably has sufficient technical skills to adapt the locking command setting as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ Xfce-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://mail.xfce.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce-bugs
