<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Michal Suchanek <<a href="mailto:hramrach@centrum.cz">hramrach@centrum.cz</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div><div></div><div class="h5">On 6 April 2011 18:34, Jerome Glisse <<a href="mailto:j.glisse@gmail.com">j.glisse@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > 2011/4/6 Michal Suchanek <<a href="mailto:hramrach@centrum.cz">hramrach@centrum.cz</a>>: >> 2011/4/5 Kristian Høgsberg <<a href="mailto:krh@bitplanet.net">krh@bitplanet.net</a>>: >>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Michal Suchanek <<a href="mailto:hramrach@centrum.cz">hramrach@centrum.cz</a>> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> what is the plan for screensave/screenlocker support in wayland? >>>> >>>> The support in X is a fail in several ways. >>> >>> It sure is. The plan for Wayland is that the lock screen is just part >>> of the compositor. There are no problems with detecting idle or other >>> applications having grabs this way, and the compositor completely >>> controls what goes on the screen so you don't have other applications >>> raising their window over the screensaver. There doesn't even have to >>> be a screensaver window, the compositor can just paint a black screen. >>> >>> It is of course possible to define a plugin or an out-of-process (fork >>> a special Wayland client and give it a special surface to render to, >>> similar to your second option below) mechanism for rendering fun >>> screensavers. >>> >> >> IMHO having anything that requires somewhat uncommon functionality as >> part of the compositor is lame. The same if a new plugin is required >> for any new function somebody comes up with. >> >> Eventually there should be multiple compositors to choose from and >> they should *not* each include everything and the kitchen sink. >> >> Thanks >> >> Michal > > I don't think it's lame, a good compositor with good theming > capabilities and you will only need one. Moreover you can add very </div></div>Seriously, it's not just look what makes the difference between a good window manager and a bad one. Maybe with wayland there is need only for one but I doubt that, there is no one-size-fits-all application of any kind I know of. Yet if you insist on the compositor doing anything that a "normal" application is not allowed to do instead of a modular system that allows authorizing applications to do something you effectively make developing a new compositor very hard, and switching between different compositors as well. <div class="im"> > usefull feature in the compositor regarding locked screen, for > instance you can force the compositor to always composite a small > picture (some kind of icon) on top of fullscreen app so no app can > malisiously present itself as being a screensaver and spy on user > password. Only the compositor would paint without the icon. This is > just one example. </div>Sure. Or you could grant your movie player the privilege to paint without an icon as your screensaver does when you are bothered by it. But that requires putting the movie player into the compositor, eh? <div class="im"> > > I think wayland design is to avoid redoing X and trying to add new > protocol for screensaver or whatever new application one might come up > with, is to be avoided. Of course that means that piece like the > compositor will have to include bunch of code that were previously > "standalone". </div>Oh, so also VNC client and server must be in the compositor (to spy on and inject events), and so must be x2x (or w2w), any application that needs to manipulate clipboard in unusual ways (such as providing format conversion), and the hotkeys application that launches your media player when you press |> on the keyboard. And rdesktop that requires raw keycodes. And a bunch I missed, I am sure. It's not like it should be a separate scrensaver protocol. It should be a protocol that any application can use to do its thing. Thanks Michal </blockquote><div>my understanding is that wayland is suppost to be a simple protocol, not the end all be all hub of the desktop, attributes could be nice but I think the overall result is that things like screen locking should be left up to the implimentation. wayland needs to be a base for putting stuff on the screen and giving input. screensavers could be setup to work different viewports or a second protocol could be used to operate the many features of the desktop</div> <div>the server could keep a whitelist of programs that inhibit the screen while running so that a malicious program doesn't leave the screen unlocked for intruders or scrape your password. There are some situations that these programs/features don't make sense .</div> <div>so that </div></div>