Re: Screensaver Solution Discussion

On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 06:42 -0600, Brian Cameron wrote:
> Jeff:
> > I summarized the steps about how screensaver works. Because a user can disable VT,
> > also because VT has not been supported on some platforms yet, for example SUN Sparc,
> > we will handle both situations separately.
> Yes, we need to support both VT and non-VT environments.  When users log 
> into XDMCP sessions, for example, they also will not have access to
> VT.
> > 1. After the user logs in, the user's gnome-screensaver (user session) process will
> > start.
> >
> > 2. When gnome-session tells that the session is idle,
> > gnome-screensaver
> > will start a full-screen window and grab the keyboard and the pointer,
> > that is to say, the user's session is locked.
> >
> > gnome-screensaver tells GDM that the user's session is locked. GDM will
> > start initializing PAM and creates the unlock dialog if VT is
> > enabled.
> >
> > 3. If the user moves the mouse or hit the keyboard
> >
> > 3a. If VT is enabled, gnome-screensaver will ask GDM to show the
> > unlock
> > dialog on another DISPLAY, and ask VT manager to switch to that DISPLAY.
> > Then the user inputs the correct password, GDM tells gnome-screensaver to
> > destroy the window and release the keyboard and the mouse. Do the VT switching
> > to the user's DISPLAY.
> >
> > 3b. If VT is not enabled, gnome-screensaver will show the unlock
> > dialog, interacting with GDM on PAM authentication. If the user input the
> > correct password, gnome-screensaver will destroy the lock window and release the keyboard and the mouse.
> >
> > For 3a, since a new GDM session is created, and GDM has already supported the accessibility, we don't need more work to do.
> >
> > But for 3b, we need consider to support the accessibility for the
> > unlock dialog. Here I CCed a11y list in order to hear their opinions.
> In both cases, GDM should launch the unlock GUI as the "gdm" user.
> Since the gdm user has the Xauth key for the session, this should be
> possible.  Running as the "gdm" user is better from a TrustedPath
> perspective.
> In the case of 3b, GDM will just launch the gdm-simple-greeter, and not
> run a new gnome-session. 
Could we still run a gnome-session for the user 'gdm'? If the gdm's
gnome-session is still running, things look simpler.

>  If it is possible for GDM to run the login
> panel, then this should be run to give access to the a11y features (note
> that this may require that gnome-settings-daemon be run for the "gdm"
> user).

I'm not sure what should be done to make GDM GUI show on the same
DISPLAY. Since gnome-screensaver has grabbed the keyboard and mouse, it
should allows GDM GUI to grab them again. Also GDM GUI needs to cover
the gnome-screensaver window. I do not know whether it is easy to
implement something like this.


> If this is not possible, then perhaps a button needs to be added to the
> GUI in this case to make it possible to pop-up a dialog to select what
> a11y features should be turned on or off.
> It also may be acceptable to require VT to work for a11y features to be
> available, and only to support a11y on displays that support VT.  But
> we need to discuss this.
> > Can I start a new at-spi-registryd for the unlock dialog? This daemon runs on a new DBUS session daemon listening on a new DBUS address.
> > The unlock process and ATs will communicate with this session daemon, which will not affect the old daemon.
> If the lock screen dialog runs as the "gdm" user then a new
> at-spi-registryd will need to be run as the "gdm" user for this to work.
> Brian

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]