Hi,
sajolida wrote (07 Dec 2015 18:22:46 GMT) :
> - gnome-screensaver is already installed by default. I'm not sure
> that's expected, so intrigeri should probably have a look.
The gnome-session-flashback package (needed by our Greeter), depends
on gnome-screensaver.
> - There's no need to run Benjamin's dconf command to be able to lock
> the screen with Win+L.
Cool.
Note, however, that it has nothing to do with gnome-screensaver: GNOME
Shell handles screen locking itself. So, in what follows, I'll
implicitly replace "gnome-screensaver" with "GNOME Shell's screen
locking functionality", which is what you meant I guess :)
> Is it safe to lock the screen this way in Tails?
Given my results on #9408, it seems that it is. Before assessing this
I'd like to go through #5684, its subtasks and blueprint to make sure
we didn't forget anything, though. I guess it's on my plate as
a side-effect of porting to Jessie ⇒ I'll do it and report back here.
And then it would be awesome if someone reintroduced the code we
removed in #8316 (display a Lock Screen button in the Shell's
top-right menu), after making it conditional to having an admin
password set.
> My second question:
> If gnome-screensaver remains in Tails Jessie, do we want to document
> this (with all the due warnings for people without an administration
> password) or do we think it will encourage people to set up an
> administration password when they don't need to and we don't want to do
> that?
I think it would be great to document it, but not a blocker for 2.0 as
long as the only UI is a keyboard shortcut.
> And the third one:
> If gnome-screensaver remains in Tails Jessie, are we OK with the current
> UX for people with no password (blanking the screen but not locking it)?
I'd rather disable it but I can live with it. See earlier discussion
on this topic:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/10403#note-3
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
