Recent searches
Search options
@pixelherodev @RL_Dane
Hmm, OpemBSD is a new one to me too. XD
Okay, so swaybg is great and all, and there are good tools for wayland (like clipman), but I *despise* swaylock. Maybe it's just me. I've never liked it, though the reasons are always shifting. The primary one has always been that it's far less customizable than i3lock was. For example, I can't find an option to passthrough media keys so that my bluetooth headset's controls work when my laptop is locked.
@pixelherodev @RL_Dane
Not gonna lie, swaylock alone has had me considering going back to i3.
…but then I'd have to give up foot as my terminal, which I love. It's a tough choice.
@RL_Dane@fosstodon.org@benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
Isn't there something analogous to foot in the #X11 world?
Also, is swaylock the only locking program available? That would stink.
I only use i3lock on a single machine, just because it's the one I used first. It's kinda basic.
On this FreeBSD box, I use simple old xlock, which seems to be decent subset of the venerable #XScreensaver
@RL_Dane @pixelherodev
1) I mean, there are other terminal emulators, but I like foot specifically. Fits my needs exactly.
2) I think I saw a couple others? I know there's swaylock-effects which is a fork, but it doesn't add the features I want. Part of the problem is that to my understanding wayland only recently got a proper locking protocol. Perhaps things will be getting better as lockers update with the new protocol.
3) I used i3lock-color. Pretty great and super customizable.
@benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
I didn't know about i3lock-color until this moment!!!
> Part of the problem is that to my understanding wayland only recently got a proper locking protocol. Perhaps things will be getting better as lockers update with the new protocol.
I wonder what @jwz would think about Wayland's locking protocol. He's the author of #XScreensaver and I recall he was quite critical of the dodgy locking mechanism that Gnome was using a few years back
@RL_Dane @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
I have basically ignored Wayland entirely, since it is incompatible with XScreenSaver. See section "The Wayland Problem" in the manual: https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/man1.html#17
I suspect the Wayland developers will take the GNOME approach and write their own locker. If you're lucky, it will actually work. If you're super extra lucky, they'll make their locker able to run XScreenSaver hacks. But I wouldn't hold my breath on either point. See also: https://www.jwz.org/blog/2021/01/i-told-you-so-2021-edition/
@jwz @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
Thanks for the info, and for replying!
Pity there isn't some kind of kernel-level lock that bypasses all of the hacky bits in X11, Wayland, or the various toolkits.
Does xlock use any xscreensaver code? I noticed that it has a lot of the older Xscreensavers that I loved, like Galaxy
@RL_Dane @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
A few of the very old savers originated in xlock or its descendant xlockmore. None of the locking or blanking logic was shared.
@jwz @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
Ah, ok. :)
@RL_Dane @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
To be clear, locking is a privileged, OS-level task and so it is right and proper for Wayland to build that into the OS (by which I mean the layer that includes the window manager, video drivers and kernel). X11's ancient design forced us to try and do an OS-level task as a user app, with predictably terrible results.
However, the Usual Suspects do not have a good track record of getting this right, so I expect comical disasters to continue unabated.
@jwz @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
Aye. Security is hard. Just ask the poor saps the developed WEP. XD
@RL_Dane @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
Before #foot I used #sakura terminal. It was good for my #i3 use.
@inigo @benjaminhollon @pixelherodev
I've heard good things about #Sakura.