https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383575
--- Comment #2 from Hello71 <alex_y...@yahoo.ca> --- (In reply to Kai Uwe Broulik from comment #1) > This is a violation of the Screensaver specification. If Mpv can't use DBus > that's too bad. They could also keep a separate process running that does > that. Hi, thank you for your response. I was unable to locate a "Screensaver specification", but read the "Idle Inhibition Service Draft" located at https://specifications.freedesktop.org/idle-inhibit-spec/0.1/, and could not identify any part that required the inhibitor application to keep the service registered. The only remotely relevant requirement appears to be that the screensaver application maintain "a well-known D-Bus name", which is obviously required in order to be located. I found no part requiring the inhibitor application to keep its service registered, merely an implication that it should keep track of its cookie. Moreover, this affects not only mpv, but all users of xdg-screensaver, whose suspend function does not work on KDE. How do you propose that be fixed? Do you say it should use org.freedesktop.PowerManagement.Inhibit instead? Why not fix kscreenlocker to meet the user expectations (as demonstrated in, now, three filed bugs)? In the alternative, if you argue that the current implementation is needed to maintain backwards-compatibility, or compatibility with Gnome, then the current behavior should at least be clearly documented somewhere in order to avoid apparent widespread user confusion. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
