On 18/08/2008, Jamie Zawinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There used to be at least xlock
> >
>
> xlock was not a screen saver. You had to turn it on and off manually.
> Until the late 1990s, when "xlockmore" was released, xlock was not a screen
> saver by any definition.
>
>
> > the fact that xscreensaver is the most widely used screensaver software
> does not make system("xscreensaver -deactivate &") the standard solution for
> disabling screensaver.
> >
>
> It does mean exactly that, actually. Unless you have some weird and
> non-useful, non-helpful definition of "standard".
So how does this solution help you when running xlockmore or not
running anything at all?
There are two kinds of standards:
1) de-facto standards supported by all (most) product in the industry
2) standards included in the specification of the system part/protocol
in question
system("xscreensaver -deactivate &") does not fall into either
category for X11 screensavers.
>
>
> > They copied that bogus faq entry into their docs as well for people
> > running xscreensaver. Running "xscreensaver -deactivate" stops the
> > player for tens of seconds because of bug in xscreensaver.
> >
>
> What "bug in xscreensaver" is this? I have never heard of such a thing.
#486603
>
>
> > The command has to be written with & so that it is executed in the
> background.
> >
>
> Ok. That's why that's what it says in my faq. What's your point?
>
No, it is not. It says:
heartbeat-cmd="xscreensaver-command -deactivate"
Thanks
Michal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
