[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xfce4-screensaver

Hi all,

I'm the one responsible for the new xfce4-screensaver project which is now included in the Xfce infrastructure (git, bugzilla, release manager). I've introduced this project as an alternative to light-locker, GNOME/MATE Screensaver, and Xscreensaver.

- Integration with the Xfce desktop (Xfdesktop, Xfce Power Manager, Xflock, Xfconf, Garcon, Xfce Settings Manager)
- Support for xdg-screensaver, ConsoleKit, Systemd
- DBUS interface for limited control and querying of the screensaver
- Idle time and inhibition state are based on the X11 Screensaver extension
- No GNOME or MATE dependencies
- Based on the GNOME and MATE screensavers, so the majority of the codebase is broadly used and tested

- Yet another screensaver
- Young, not widely tested

I sought to make this project after shipping light-locker in Xubuntu for years. For hardware that supports VT swiching effectively, light-locker has been great and served us well. For hardware that does not VT switch well, users are getting locked out of their desktop and losing their work. Since the VT switch is basically how light-locker functions, this is not something that can be easily remedied and is pretty much dependent on the kernel and graphics drivers.

There's been a lot of interest already, and there are packages available across several other distributions. This by no means that it should be included in Debian, but there is a strong possibility that we will have it packaged in Ubuntu.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'm also available on #debian-xfce if we want to have a longer conversation about it.

Just as a note, I'll be releasing a new version in the next few days with a large number of improvements.

Sean (bluesabre)

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:01 AM Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> wrote:
Hash: SHA512

Hi Yves-Alexis

On 2018/11/21 16:23, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> So: what are the pros and cons of xfce4-screensaver? I have no idea wh
y there
> is yet another screensaver rewrite/fork upstream, but it's done. That
> said that doesn't mean we need to introduce it in Debian.

This is essentially a fork of mate-screensaver (which was a fork of the
original gnome-screensaver) but without all the mate dependencies. It
has better integration with xfce than xscreensaver, especially in terms
of appearance and its theming.

I would not pit it directly against light-locker since they are somewhat
different tools. light-locker is a screen lock utility that integrates
with lightdm, where xfce4-screensaver also locks your screen but
displays screensavers while doing so.

xfce4-screensaver is also still in an early phase, and I don't think it
would be wise to replace light-locker with xfce4-screensaver any time so

Having said that, I do intend to use it, and have users who want to use
it, and having it in Debian is a lot better than users having to get it
from some random PPA. I can't think of a reason why it would be
inappropriate to have this in Debian at all.

> Why fixing light-locker is not possible? What assurance do we have the
> screensaver won't be ditched for something else in a few months/year?

I don't think that such an assurance exists for any software. IMHO the
amount of login managers, screensavers, etc is already a mess and I
actually hope that we'll be able to ditch some of the existing
implementations in the future for something that makes more sense (no
chance of that happening for buster though).

- -Jonathan

- --
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jcc>
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer - https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org
  ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀  Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.



Sean Davis

Reply to: