[Desktop_architects] The experience of an ISV

Bastian, Waldo waldo.bastian at intel.com
Tue Feb 14 14:41:42 PST 2006

>On Feb 14, 06 14:50:06 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
>> Xtst is a local only "solution".  As such, it doesn't help LTSP.
>IMHO it is not a solution at all. It is an ugly workaround, a kludge.
>> There are (at least) two ways to solve this problem, that can/should
>> discussed on the xdg list:
>>    o use of a X property somewhere to communicate with a session
>> management daemon (or window manager) of this desire.
>>    o use of an out of band mechanism like DBUS.
>> Either is satisfactory from my perspective.  Note that a proper
>> using DBUS will beg cross system issues (and making dbus secure
>> the network); this ought to be done in any case (I know some work was
>> done to add security to dbus in the past; I don't know its current
>> status).  Folks like LTSP (and others) really care about running over
>> the network, and this should be possible.
>I think something related to the X protocol (e.g. *no* DBUS) is much
>more convenient, because one wants to disable the screen saver on a
>particular display. Authorization and identification comes for free
>done using the X protocol.

Can a screensaver query the status of "xset s on/off" anywhere?


More information about the Desktop_architects mailing list