> But the blank timeout is set to 10mins by default ...
Unless there is something hard coded into light-locker, this shouldn't
be an issue: ll-settings will set two timings only and will disable (=0)
the other ones. With xfpm running: xset s 0 dpms t1 0 t2, and without:
xset s t1 dpms t2 0 0.
--
Yes, it's the first event. But the blank timeout is set to 10mins by
default, so it's not entirely unlikely that this will trigger
(unexpected and - at least via GUI - uncontrollable) timed locking.
Removing the ability to control the blank time means we'd have to
disable blanking altogether.
--
Are you sure? If I use lock session when screensaver is activated, delay: 10s
and xset s 100 dpms 10 0 120. Session locks after 20s.
Same with xset s 0 dpms 10 0 120.
So the first pm event seems to start the timer.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, w
Yeah, I know. Losing control over blanking isn't really an option, as it
defines the timeout for light-locker's timed-locking feature.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1393767
Title:
[t
Just to be sure there is no misunderstanding, I was talking about light-
locker-settings 1.2.1 and xfpm 1.2.0 (both from trusty). The patch is
for those versions. If you decide to apply it, we will loose a gui to
set screen blanking (it will be turned off), but we will gain better
consistency with
As I already said, backporting those features is not really an option,
even though trusty will be around for quite a bit (simply because our
workforce is too limited for that – feel free to help out and propose
patches).
The main problem the dependency chain (xfce4-power-manager 1.4 needs a
newer
> You could argue that the DPMS settings conflict and that this one
should be removed though.
dpms don't conflict, because they are synced between xfpm and light-
locker-settings.
> Since no service handles the blank times with the switch away from
XScreensaver to light-locker, we decided that li
The attachment "dont_set_screen_blank.patch" seems to be a patch. If it
isn't, please remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the
"patch" tag, and if you are a member of the ~ubuntu-reviewers,
unsubscribe the team.
[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by
~
Since no service handles the blank times with the switch away from
XScreensaver to light-locker, we decided that light-locker-settings
should take care of it until xfce4-power-manager was ready. So the
current solution in trusty makes perfect sense. You could argue that the
DPMS settings conflict a
> DPMS sleep/standby/off time is not the same as blank time and xfpm1.2
didn't handle blanking at all.
Thats my point exactly: If xfpm is running light-locker-settings should
not apply any screen blank settings, because xfpm does not handle it.
I've attached a patch which makes light-locker-setti
DPMS sleep/standby/off time is not the same as blank time and xfpm1.2
didn't handle blanking at all. We added that in 1.4, but that came out
too late for Trusty. Backporting those features is not really an option,
even though trusty will be around for quite a bit (simply because our
workforce is to
11 matches
Mail list logo
