Hi,
In a fresh install of Buster with XFCE desktop, locking the screen
blanks the monitor and the monitor enters a power save state. After
that, neither moving the mouse nor typing on the keyboard would turn
the monitor back on.
I could find two ways to get the display back on:
1. Typing the pass
(This probably belonged on debian-user, but since I have background on
this specific problem and already did the research.)
Raj Kiran Grandhi writes:
> In a fresh install of Buster with XFCE desktop, locking the screen
> blanks the monitor and the monitor enters a power save state. After
> that,
Hi Russ,
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 06:32:52PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> (This probably belonged on debian-user, but since I have background on
> this specific problem and already did the research.)
While this seems to be a problem for debian-user its very sensible that
the issue was raised here
> > Switching to another greeter from the default gtk-greeter appears to help
> > according to that bug, which may mean that the bug is actually in
> > lightdm-gtk-greeter. There doesn't appear to be a Debian bug for this; it
> > might be a good idea to open one against light-locker (or, if you co
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 11:06:42AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > This appears to be a bug in light-locker specifically, which is the
> > default screen lock program with XFCE with lightdm. See, for instance:
> >
> > https://github.com/the-cavalry/light-locker/issues/114
> >
> > Switching to an
Hey Adam
On 2019/06/01 18:29, Adam Borowski wrote:
> At the time of the xscreensaver debacle, there was no sane alternative
> (candidates depended on 80% of GNOME, offered no feedback nor discoverable
> controls to the user, etc). There _is_ a wonderful alternative now:
> xfce4-screensaver, which
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 06:29:31PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Using unstable myself, I'm not sure what to recommend for Buster.
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/physlock
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Adam Borowski writes:
> But, the culprit is light-locker. In general, it's in such a buggy
> state that I believe it shouldn't be in the distribution at all, much
> less a default of any kind. After it replaced xscreensaver[1] as the
> xfce's dependency, I went into some pretty heated arguments
On Sat, 01 Jun 2019 11:04:28 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It's worth noting here that xscreensaver has an IMO serious security
> vulnerability (unless maybe this has been fixed?): because it doesn't
> integrate properly with the desktop, it doesn't hide desktop
> notifications.
I can't reproduc
gregor herrmann writes:
> I can't reproduce this in a quick test:
> Terminal 1: sleep 5 ; notify-send foo
> Terminal 2: xscreensaver-command -lock
> No "foo" notification pops up over the screensaver image.
> (This is with awesome, maybe the story is different for desktop
> environments.)
Ye
Hi Russ, all,
On 19-06-01 11:04:28, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I did some research on that a while back and ended up not filing a bug
> about it because it looked relatively pointless. It appeared to be a
> deep design choice on both sides, and not something anyone was likely
> to solve, so I just swi
Georg Faerber writes:
> On 19-06-01 11:04:28, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I did some research on that a while back and ended up not filing a bug
>> about it because it looked relatively pointless. It appeared to be a
>> deep design choice on both sides, and not something anyone was likely
>> to solve
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 06:16:58AM +0530, Raj Kiran Grandhi wrote:
>
> In a fresh install of Buster with XFCE desktop, locking the screen
> blanks the monitor and the monitor enters a power save state. After
> that, neither moving the mouse nor typing on the keyboard would turn
> the monitor back
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 09:20:48PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
I can't reproduce this in a quick test:
Terminal 1: sleep 5 ; notify-send foo
Terminal 2: xscreensaver-command -lock
No "foo" notification pops up over the screensaver image.
(This is with awesome, maybe the story is different fo
Jonathan Dowland writes:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 09:20:48PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
>> I can't reproduce this in a quick test:
>>
>> Terminal 1: sleep 5 ; notify-send foo
>> Terminal 2: xscreensaver-command -lock
>>
>> No "foo" notification pops up over the screensaver image.
>>
>> (This
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Fri, 2019-05-31 at 18:32 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This appears to be a bug in light-locker specifically, which is the
> default screen lock program with XFCE with lightdm. See, for instance:
>
> https://github.com/the-cavalry/light-locker/is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 21:55 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> I noted Andreas raised the severity, but I hope someone has an idea how to fix
> that because I don't.
Also, since it was posted on -devel, I guess there's a bit of exposure: if
some peop
Yves-Alexis Perez writes:
> Actually it seems to me that the bug is a bad interaction with light-
> locker/lightdm locking system (which relies on vt switch) and the Intel
> driver. It only seems to happens on this driver, and I think it's also
> been reproduced just by doing vt-switches (but can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 12:59 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ah, good call. I was also seeing other problems with the Intel driver in
> combination with light-locker where the monitor resolution would be set to
> some incorrect value after restore from
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 4:12 AM Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> My gut feeling is that light-locker just uses codepaths not really used
> otherwise, like vt-switch at the same time as suspend/resume or screen off/on.
> Unfortunately debugging i915 is completely out of my league (and I already
> tried mu
20 matches
Mail list logo
