On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:39:48PM +0200, Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Stupid question, but since kdm links X11 and communicates with the
> greeter anyway: can we simply have it grab keyboard and mouse (must
> create a window in the session for this purpose, but it runs on root
> privs)
>
using the kdm
Am Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:37:41 -0400
schrieb Michael Pyne :
> Sure it can. Just click "Test" in the Display & Monitor screen saver
> options. ;) There's probably some DBus call to do the same thing.
i thought about "kstart --fullscreen kdeasciiquarium", fails because
the window us resized externally
Am Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:24:55 +0200
schrieb todd rme :
> At least for me wobbly windows provides visual feedback when moving
> windows that I find useful. I used it a lot on compiz, but the Kwin
> one never really worked all that well but I would have it enabled if
> it did.
Try advanced mode, the
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Martin Koller wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11. October 2011 21:11:03 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
>
>> > I consider most effects being "bling" yes, with that said I like it and
>> > appreciate it but still most effects add no real productive value.
>> I have to disagree. By defau
On Thursday 13 October 2011 17:29:16 Martin Koller wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11. October 2011 21:11:03 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > > I consider most effects being "bling" yes, with that said I like it and
> > > appreciate it but still most effects add no real productive value.
> >
> > I have to disagree.
On Tuesday, 11. October 2011 21:11:03 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > I consider most effects being "bling" yes, with that said I like it and
> > appreciate it but still most effects add no real productive value.
> I have to disagree. By default we ship no effect which is "bling"
> only. They all add p
On Wednesday, 12. October 2011 02:12:55 Thomas Lübking wrote:
Let me give my view here:
> Do you have configured a "saver" beyond dpms?
> And if, why?
> Do you use a locker beyond a black screen?
> And if, why?
yes to both (diashow).
Reason: make other people wandering by (or sitting in the
On Wednesday 12 October 2011 19:38:11 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 04:47:54PM +0200, Dario Freddi wrote:
> > 2011/10/12 Martin Gräßlin :
> > > ok I have been thinking about it and have a new proposal:
> > > * writing a kded module to only handle the screen locking (grab keybo
On Wednesday, October 12, 2011 20:43:41 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:46:40 -0400 schrieb Michael Pyne :
> > Yes. KDE asciiquarium (feel free to look at the copyright headers for
> > that in kdeartwork someday... ;)
>
> Errr... rather not. The author, *cough* who ever he might be *
Am Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:10:40 +0200
schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen :
> that's not a response to my question. the old lock engine offers the
> option to start a saver which only after a few seconds requires a
> password to make it go away.
I think it was, because the idea is that the locker, unlike today
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:46:40 -0400
schrieb Michael Pyne :
> Yes. KDE asciiquarium (feel free to look at the copyright headers for
> that in kdeartwork someday... ;)
Errr... rather not. The author, *cough* who ever he might be *cough*
has apparently so far not found the time to implement the resize
On Wednesday 12 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 October 2011 08:26:20 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20.54.42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200
> > >
> > > schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > > > Screensaver is bling only
> > >
> > >
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 04:47:54PM +0200, Dario Freddi wrote:
> 2011/10/12 Martin Gräßlin :
> > ok I have been thinking about it and have a new proposal:
> > * writing a kded module to only handle the screen locking (grab keyboard and
> > mouse)
>
> TBH, if you really care about not making the thi
2011/10/12 Martin Gräßlin :
> On Wednesday 12 October 2011 09:10:40 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> > Of course KWin is a more complex application than others, but given
>> > what we need in a screen locker the difference becomes marginal IMHO.
>>
>> yes. one should consider decoupling the greeter fro
On Wednesday 12 October 2011 09:10:40 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > Of course KWin is a more complex application than others, but given
> > what we need in a screen locker the difference becomes marginal IMHO.
>
> yes. one should consider decoupling the greeter from the core engine.
>
> > > > I m
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 06:30:40PM +0200, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 17:34:10 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > on a more serious note, [h]ow do you handle the lock grace time?
>
> this is actually not affected by the changes. Dim Display and turning off the
> screen are decoup
On Wednesday 12 October 2011 08:26:20 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20.54.42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200
> >
> > schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > > Screensaver is bling only
> >
> > No, "screensaver hacks are bling only", a "screensaver" is a
> > soft
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20.54.42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200
>
> schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > Screensaver is bling only
>
> No, "screensaver hacks are bling only", a "screensaver" is a
> software relic.
(Semantics)
> The key aspect is "when and why is there eye-
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 21.11.03 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20:12:39 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
[...]
> > But you also said that the screensaver without locking was going away in
> > 4.9. This is what I'm against.
>
> As Thomas wrote you will always be able to run any animatio
On Wednesday, October 12, 2011 02:12:55 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:47:52 -0400 schrieb Michael Pyne :
> > On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 20:54:42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> > > BUT: running them automatically because you're away and the system
> > > is idle is simply not a justifiabl
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:47:52 -0400
schrieb Michael Pyne :
> On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 20:54:42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> > BUT: running them automatically because you're away and the system
> > is idle is simply not a justifiable (anymore)
>
> With all due respect, and with full agreement that s
On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 20:54:42 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> BUT: running them automatically because you're away and the system is
> idle is simply not a justifiable (anymore)
With all due respect, and with full agreement that screen savers are not in
general required to *protect the screen*... w
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:42:10 +0200
schrieb Ingo Klöcker :
> Until recently I used to believe this. Unfortunately, it's not true.
> At work we have several (well, at least two) TFTs which have the line
> edit of the login screen burned in. It's clearly visible before a
> dark gray mono-colored back
On Tuesday 11 October 2011, todd rme wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Alexander Neundorf
wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
> >> > From here:
> >> > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leak
On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
>
> schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> > password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild usecase? It's what I
> > use at home all the time.
>
> "Why that
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
>> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
>> > From here:
>> > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the system is
>> > hardly useable due to missing
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:06:13 +0200
schrieb Alexander Neundorf :
> You can also switch to a text-mode console (Ctrl+F1 etc), set
> DISPLAY, and start the window manager there.
Errr... "no".
In case there's an open VT and chvt is permitted, it's
completely pointless to lock the screen, since the chv
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 21:06:13 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
> > > From here:
> > > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the system is
> > > hardly useable due to m
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20:12:39 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 19.52.36 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 18:02:32 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote:
> > > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
> > > >
> > > > schrieb T
On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
> > From here:
> > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the system is
> > hardly useable due to missing window manager. This situation can savely
> > be ignored as a cor
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200
schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> Screensaver is bling only
No, "screensaver hacks are bling only", a "screensaver" is a
software relic.
The key aspect is "when and why is there eye-candy".
You can still run all scsreensavers to look at them, they're just
ordinary single
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 19.52.36 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 18:02:32 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote:
> > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
> > >
> > > schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > > > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 18:02:32 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote:
> > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
> >
> > schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> > > password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
>
> schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> > password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild usecase? It's what I
> > use at home all the time.
>
> "Why that?"
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 17:34:10 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 03:55:15PM +0200, Thomas Lübking wrote:
> > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200 schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> > > password unlock? If so why is tha
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:34:10 +0200
schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen :
> "because it's pretty"?
"Sink me, I say!" -- Blakeney, Wooster - and it's even a "poem"
I however prefer to be present when the pretties show up (see att.)
Cheers,
Thomas
matrix
Description: Binary data
On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 16:33:39 Thomas L�bking wrote:
> Also it's not required to have the terminal on top of the stack - i've
> always been very successful abusing MMB c&p to clickpaste me any
> command i wanted ;-)
Seems I'm not alone doing that. :)
Andras
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 17:47:13 you wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:00:46 +0200
>
> schrieb Martin Gräßlin :
> > that is a good suggestion. I will think about how I can add that.
> > Though if someone breaks by crashing kwin he is also able to remove
> > any log. So this could be just snakeoil.
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:00:46 +0200
schrieb Martin Gräßlin :
> that is a good suggestion. I will think about how I can add that.
> Though if someone breaks by crashing kwin he is also able to remove
> any log. So this could be just snakeoil.
He'll be able to click away the message, yes.
But unless
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 03:55:15PM +0200, Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200 schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> > password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild usecase? It's what I
> > use at home all the time.
>
>
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:33:39 you wrote:
> Once the screen locker crashes, security must be assumed
> broken (if only by visual access).
> Therefore the locker must not crash
full ack, we have to be at 0 crashes in KWin (which has to be our goal for
Wayland anyway ;-)
> and if it does, re-es
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:00:17 +0200
schrieb Martin Gräßlin :
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
> > This is not true, the system can be used without a window manager
> > and if you happen to have a running terminal or start one, it is
> > possible to start a new window manag
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote:
> From here:
> "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the system is
> hardly useable due to missing window manager. This situation can savely
> be ignored as a corner case as KWin normaly restart."
>
> This is not true, th
Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200
schrieb Torgny Nyblom :
> Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with
> password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild usecase? It's what I
> use at home all the time.
"Why that?"
xdpms saves you power (and screen, if that would be any necessa
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15:33:39 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 October 2011 14.55.29 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > On Monday 10 October 2011 20:02:07 Parker Coates wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > > > I want to request a security audit for the changes to en
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 14.55.29 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Monday 10 October 2011 20:02:07 Parker Coates wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > > I want to request a security audit for the changes to ensure that
> > > the new implementation is as secure as the existi
On Monday 10 October 2011 20:02:07 Parker Coates wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > I want to request a security audit for the changes to ensure that the new
> > implementation is as secure as the existing one and that I did not forget
> > an important case which would
On Sunday, October 09, 2011 20:02:27 Martin Gr��lin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> as you might know we have been working on moving the screenlocker from
> KRunner to KWin and passed the control to the compositor (iff
> compositing is active) to ensure that nothing which should not be
> shown gets visible.
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> I want to request a security audit for the changes to ensure that the new
> implementation is as secure as the existing one and that I did not forget an
> important case which would compromise the security.
>
> The general concept of the new scr
49 matches
Mail list logo
