expanding the inhibit spec
hramrach at gmail.com
Wed Jan 22 10:43:25 PST 2014
Lennart Poettering <mzkqt <at> 0pointer.de> writes:
> On Thu, 09.01.14 13:08, Ryan Lortie (desrt <at> desrt.ca) wrote:
> > It's a whole other issue, though, when we start to talk about
> > independent app vendors who don't want to use Gtk. People who want to
> > make something in SDL and have it just work. What do we tell them? I
> > guess we could start by asking them "what is your intended platform?"
> > "I don't know.. GNOME? The freedesktop APIs? Linux? systemd-using
> > systems?"
> How many systems are those currently, and how many are those going to be
> in a year or two? I mean, by then the set of systems that have dbus (and
> possibly a future fdo inhibitor service) and the set of systems that
> have logind is probably going to be identical, no? I mean, if people
> avoid logind, aren't they also avoiding dbus?
What is logind and can I start it after the fact when I find it's needed for
some weird GTK feature to work?
I can certainly do that with dbus when I find that GTK insists on using dbus
to notify the screensaver that the user is not idle.
More information about the xdg