expanding the inhibit spec

Ryan Lortie desrt at desrt.ca
Tue Jan 7 14:40:21 PST 2014


On Tue, Jan 7, 2014, at 16:27, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> I've seen users click "Shut Down" and then close the lid or turn the
> monitor off. Delay is exactly what we want here. An app shouldn't
> permanently inhibit Shut Down. Yes, the user may lose some data, but
> staying open forever wouldn't help here, you'd just run out of battery
> and
> crash.

This is not what "delay" means in this context.  Delay here is used for
apps that want to add a (very) short delay to suspend, etc. so that they
can do some task just before the machine powers down.  It's for cases
like the one Simon brought up earlier -- where the screensaver wants to
make sure the screen is in the locked state before the machine goes

I consider that it would be a matter of system policy if the session
elects to ignore the "block" inhibits after some period of time.  For
example, if I have gedit blocking logout with "You have unsaved changes;
are you sure?" and the user doesn't reply to that dialog for 60 seconds,
it may well be the policy of the desktop environment that the system
will go down anyway, gedit be damned.


More information about the xdg mailing list