When choosing Prevent Screen Locking for one of the edges of the screen and then placing the cursor in that edge, the screen saver is launched anyway. This was working correctly in the previous version, and I know there have been some bugs with the new screen locker, so it might be that component that is ignoring the setting rather than a Kwin error. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Set the Screen Locker settings to start after 1 minute 2. Set the one of the Active Screen Edge Actions to Prevent Screen Locking 3. Move cursor to chosen edge for action 4. Wait one minute Actual Results: Screen Locker (Screen Saver) is launched Expected Results: Screen should remain unlocked
The code in KWin for this has been broken for a long time (removed that part in the new screen edges implementation for 4.11 as it is was a NO-OP - see http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=kde-workspace.git&a=blob&h=a1507c3543877477e564bba368feaa31bc44655e&hb=30802f8bcd2651a7afec2eef87fea6e5097ad1a8&f=kwin%2Fscreenedge.cpp line 284) if the old screen locker supported that it must have been something in the screen locker. Personally I find the feature very questionable.
(In reply to comment #1) > The code in KWin for this has been broken for a long time (removed that part > in the new screen edges implementation for 4.11 as it is was a NO-OP - see > http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=kde-workspace. > git&a=blob&h=a1507c3543877477e564bba368feaa31bc44655e&hb=30802f8bcd2651a7afec > 2eef87fea6e5097ad1a8&f=kwin%2Fscreenedge.cpp line 284) > > if the old screen locker supported that it must have been something in the > screen locker. Personally I find the feature very questionable. I do seem to recall it sometimes working and sometimes not in previous versions. I did not realize it was completely broken. I feel it is a very useful feature as not all applications that are run full screen automatically disable the screen locker and having a quick way to disable it without going through system settings every time you wish to do it is very handy.
Hi Martin, I use this feature since it was introduced years ago and I love it very much. As the reporter of this bug says it is a very useful feature and it should be fixed. Vlc for example is unable to inhibit the screen locker so you have to disable screen locking through the system settings which is a non-practical procedure. The screen locking prevention was already broken some time before in an earlier version (4.5 or 4.6) and hopefully it will be fixed in 4.10.x. Regards, Ralf
Hi, I have the same problem and wonder: doesn't anybody else watch youtube/flash video's and have screen lock enabled? Or how do you guys deal with this? In my situation: - screenlock must be easily disableable (funny, no?), for example using a hot corner/edge. Because otherwise my screen gets locked all the time when watching a flash movie. Ideally the browser would notify the system but i guess that's not possible. - screenlock is used to display black screensaver so to save power/prevent burn in but still keep my monitor's built-in loudspeakers active for playing music - dpms is only used in case I forgot to turn off my monitor (i.e. after 2 hours) Lately, I disabled screenlock completely but the disadvantage is that my screen stays on, even when I'm not on the computer/computer is only playing music. Which is a pity :) @Martin I'd like to better understand your concerns about this feature. Should it be implemented somewhere else using different mechanisms? Or do you simply not see a valid use case?
https://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=96792 I have this issue too. MS Windows and Mac OS X both allow to avoid the screensaver from becoming active in certain cases, like watching fullscreen video. And that without resorting to hot corner black magic. The Joe Users out there won't understand why this wouldn't work on Linux/KDE ... and that won't make them any more inclined to use the environment. And frankly, I they'd have a point. Whether or not it's proper practice to disable screen locking and/or the screensaver with a hot corner is a rather moot point if it's the only sensible way to compensate for missing system calls (simulating user activity) and/or applications (Flash...) actually using such calls. R.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 331841 ***