From owner-freebsd-xfce@freebsd.org Sun Sep 29 02:04:19 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xfce@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A3E0E9681 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46gpkB6XgFz3QrS for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id E072EE9680; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: xfce@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E035DE967F for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46gpkB5h9Kz3QrQ for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5F56ACBA for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x8T24IG0062055 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x8T24IpM062054 for xfce@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: xfce@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 240804] x11/xfce4-screensaver: Newly Installed via pkg upgrade Does Not Allow Password Input and xscreensaver No Longer Function Forcing User to Reboot Frequently and/or Data Loss Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: jlmales@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: xfce@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback+ X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xfce@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: XFCE for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 02:04:19 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D240804 --- Comment #15 from John --- (In reply to Guido Falsi from comment #12) Re "Somewh= ere in your messages you ask me not to disable xscreensaver by default...why? Havi= ng BOTH enabled cannot work." Re "The question now is how should xfce handle two or more different screensav= ers on the system? In my opinion there are different pros and cons for any of = the possible solutions. One aspect to take into consideration is xscreensaver works on multiple DEs where as xfce4-screensaver likely only works with XFC= E4.=20 For those that have multiple DEs they can and do use it would seem likely, = but not a sure thing, that xscreensaver should take precedence as the screensav= er enabled for the DE, ergo precedence for XFCE4. This is just one thought of= a few approaches that I think merits some discussion to see what seems the be= st approach to take. I suspect this may be difficult discussion in that I can= see many approaches that may makes sense as well. I suggested the rational for xscreensaver based on xscreensaver most likely works in most, if not all DE= s.=20 That said discussion should occur to see what other thoughts are and the pros/cons of those before deciding what approach will be taken." --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=