On Wed, 17.04.13 17:20, Jan Engelhardt ([email protected]) wrote: > > > On Wednesday 2013-04-17 16:42, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >On Wed, 17.04.13 06:58, Jan Engelhardt ([email protected]) wrote: > > > >Well, the current logic is that we suspend when the lid is > >closed,[...] Lid switch inhibitor locks are currently per-VT, i.e. a > >lock taken by GNOME is considered irrelevant if you switch away from > >GNOME.[...] So in order to make sure the lid switch suspend works > >fine even when you happen to switch away from GNOME logind will > >handle it then. > > That reasoning is perfectly fine; the problem is that logind > acts upon a physical lid state change from the distant past.
Well, it is level-triggered, not edge-triggered. If the lid is closed and a lock released we immediately act and suspend. That's the only reliable and safe way to do that. Or are you saying that you had an X session running which took the lock, then closed and reopened the lid, and when you then switched to a VT the machine was suspended? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
