On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

The systemd version in Factory now handles power/suspend/ hibernate keys and lidswitch by default which breaks power-managers which are not systemd-aware (see e.g. bnc#789057),

As far as I can see, this bug has working fix suggested.

that is everything except GNOME3/KDE4

And this fix effectively does the same as GNOME3/KDE4 - request logind to refrain from handling those keys. Thus making it "systemd-aware" :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Le mercredi 16 janvier 2013 à 11:54 +0100, Guido Berhoerster a écrit :

* Andrey Borzenkov [2013-01-16 11:45]:

...

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

The systemd version in Factory now handles power/suspend/ hibernate keys and lidswitch by default which breaks power-managers which are not systemd-aware (see e.g. bnc#789057),

As far as I can see, this bug has working fix suggested.

No it has not, there is only a crude workaround calling systemd-inhibit from the Xfce session wrapper regardless of whether the session actually runs a power manager or not.

The other alternative is to get Xfce to interface properly with logind.. -- Frederic Crozat SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

behavior (for which I can't see any benefit).

Well, it finally enables power management in text-only mode. Something I missed for quite some time. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 12:34:02 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

* Andrey Borzenkov [2013-01-16 12:26]:

...

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

behavior (for which I can't see any benefit).

Well, it finally enables power management in text-only mode. Something I missed for quite some time.

That has always been possible via acpid, it just wasn't enabled by default (probably because there is no significant amount of users who run their laptops using only the console).

One less demon to run is an improvement. If you are willing to go to systemd, then tasks that it can do as well as other demons, it should do. Regards Oliver -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2013 06:57 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

Can we change the systemd default settings back to what they are/were with acpid, that is handle only the power button (if possible, only if no DE is running)?

No, whatever other DE that is broken needs fixing. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

* Cristian Rodríguez [2013-01-16 14:36]:

On 01/16/2013 06:57 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

Can we change the systemd default settings back to what they are/were with acpid, that is handle only the power button (if possible, only if no DE is running)?

No, whatever other DE that is broken needs fixing.

The defaults were changed breaking everything not depending on systemd. It also has nothing to do with systemd itself, it would be just as broken if acpid would start handling these buttons by default. That said, feel free to send patches for the power managers I mentioned. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Am 16.01.2013 12:13, schrieb Frederic Crozat:

The other alternative is to get Xfce to interface properly with logind..

Well, no. Systemd has broken it for everyone and now everybody needs to adapt to the new world order because systemd says so? Not a good idea. (And yes, there would actually be benefits from systemd handling lid and power and suspend buttons -- namely that it will even work when the screensaver is active which it did not in any desktop the last time I looked -- but only if it can be made configurable which seems to be not the case unfortunately). -- Stefan Seyfried "If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Am 16.01.2013 14:37, schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:

On 01/16/2013 08:46 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

I was not asking to go back to acpid but to revert the _default_ behavior reacting to suspend/hibernate keys.

So you want to change the default behaviour of everything else to please one broken desktop environment ? I dont think that is a good idea.

No. Every desktop environment has to opt out of systemd button handling. It would be much easier to let the users that really want systemd to handle the suspend buttons to opt-in. -- Stefan Seyfried "If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2013 03:53 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

It would be much easier to let the users that really want systemd to handle the suspend buttons to opt-in.

question: who is going to maintain that ? I disagree, we should provide only one way that works. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

On 01/16/2013 03:53 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

It would be much easier to let the users that really want systemd to handle the suspend buttons to opt-in.

question: who is going to maintain that ?

I disagree, we should provide only one way that works.

Jumping in to this discussion... I agree with this sentiment. The percentage of users who are going to (re)configure the mechanism that handles suspend buttons is very small, and in any case, those users know what they are doing. The percentage of users who want it to "just work" -- and don't care HOW it works -- is very high. How we make it work is less important than the fact that it does work properly, out of the box. openSUSE is supposed to be an integrated whole that all works together, not just a bunch of RPMs thrown together. If that means losing a marginal feature, that's unfortunate... but in most situations reliability is higher priority than marginal functionality. Just my $0.02. -Archie -- Archie L. Cobbs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Am 16.01.2013 20:22, schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:

On 01/16/2013 03:49 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

Am 16.01.2013 12:13, schrieb Frederic Crozat:

...

The other alternative is to get Xfce to interface properly with logind..

Well, no.

Systemd has broken it for everyone and now everybody needs to adapt to the new world order because systemd says so?

Yes, that's it, unless of course someone wants to take care of N ways to do things which will end half-implemented, half-working with no coherent structure. never focusing for the sake of "choice".

Every DE will override the systemd stuff anyway, it's not like gnome power management will suddenly let systemd handle the events. So nothing is gained by additionally having systemd intervene by default. -- Stefan Seyfried "If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:

...

The percentage of users who are going to (re)configure the mechanism that handles suspend buttons is very small, and in any case, those users know what they are doing.

Where do you get that impression?

Most people (I know) want to decide (through the DE control panel or whatever configuration mechanism is native to the DE) whether and how their PC will respond to those actions.

I was referring to reconfiguring the mechanism, i.e., swapping out systemd vs. whatever, not reconfiguring the behavior. Yes I agree people want to reconfigure the behavior all the time. My point is simply that a lot more people will be mad if the default installation doesn't work properly than will be delighted because of some incremental new feature gained by changing to a new mechanism that only half works.

To include a sensible default, or a unified implementation, has nothing to do with that wish of controlship. DE configuration mechanisms just have to work, otherwise openSUSE's DE just regressed like 5 years (or a few at least).

Agreed. -Archie -- Archie L. Cobbs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed 16 Jan 2013 05:19:27 PM CLST, Jiri Slaby wrote:

On 01/16/2013 08:22 PM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 01/16/2013 03:49 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

Am 16.01.2013 12:13, schrieb Frederic Crozat:

...

The other alternative is to get Xfce to interface properly with logind..

Well, no.

Systemd has broken it for everyone and now everybody needs to adapt to the new world order because systemd says so?

Yes, that's it, unless of course someone wants to take care of N ways to

No, that's definitely not how Linux is supposed to work. The first and unbreakable rule is *no regressions*. Anywhere [1]. Systemd started being a piece of shit and tries to continue in that by constantly breaking the rule and breaking non-mainstream stuff (heck, redhat guys I talked to used to be kidding about that by saying that it boots exclusively on the Lennart's laptop). Stop spreading that crap. The developers just cannot break everything and move their hands off spitting at people to fix their stuff. This is not how mature developers do coding. And yet, this is not for the first time; pm-utils removal is the last example I remember.

Don't you see how bad the design of that software is?

No, the only thing I see is old-beards complaining and whinning when things change. Linus can use of enforce whatever rules he wants , flame an insult everybody, I dont want to be part of that culture and mindset. You could not choose a worst example than LKML to make your point. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2013 09:33 PM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

Don't you see how bad the design of that software is?

No,

No? So having systemd as a one unmaintenable monolithic block comprising misc irrelevant pieces of code like udev, pm-utils, xinet, etc is just fine? First class university student wouldn't do that. (Well they would, but see what I mean? They did not even know what pm-utils were doing before they shot them completely.)

the only thing I see is old-beards complaining and whinning when things change.

Hehe, not at all. I bet I was the first one to use systemd in opensuse regularly. What I do is complaining and whining here, yes, but not when things change, but when they *break* on a regular basis.

Linus can use of enforce whatever rules he wants , flame an insult everybody, I dont want to be part of that culture and mindset.

You could not choose a worst example than LKML to make your point.

Do not take the words he uses in that email. I don't like that kind of insultation either. Take the point instead. The point is that we do not break stuff. And if we do, we fix ourselves or revert if fixing is infeasible. That's the point. -- js suse labs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2013 01:03 AM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

El 16/01/13 20:45, Jiri Slaby escribió:

...

On 01/16/2013 09:33 PM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

...

Don't you see how bad the design of that software is?

No,

No? So having systemd as a one unmaintenable monolithic block comprising misc irrelevant pieces of code like udev, pm-utils, xinet, etc is just fine?

Where did you got this idea that systemd is monolithic.. ?

I mean the sources are monolithic and they should not as there is no reason, because the parts are totally different in what they are doing. What the heck is the reason of merging udev and maintaining it in a way it can be built separately from systemd? Why it is in the systemd repo in the first place, it makes no sense at all. It's like merging KDE and Xorg and saying we have it one place, hooray! At least on suse udev is packaged as a separate binary rpm. Not the case for all other distros. -- js suse labs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Hi all, Am 17.01.2013 00:45, schrieb Jiri Slaby:

Hehe, not at all. I bet I was the first one to use systemd in opensuse regularly.

Same here. Maybe not the first one, but in general I consider myself "systemd-friendly" and like the general idea and impelementation.

What I do is complaining and whining here, yes, but not when things change, but when they *break* on a regular basis.

Yes, the problem is the attitue: "we break everything for everyone and have them fix up after us". None of the desktops was really broken wrt. powerbutton and suspendkey handling. Maybe the console was if not configured via acpid, but the desktops all worked. Now they fixed the console case and in the same instant broke all the desktops. The desktops now suddenly need to change the previously working things to accomodate the changes in systemd defaults. That's an attitude that I strongly dislike. So for my packages, the possibility is high that if a systemd update breaks them and makes me hunt for fixes, I'll silently abandon or plain droprequest them because this really takes all the fun out of packaging etc if some guys are actively sabotaging everybody else araound.

Do not take the words he uses in that email. I don't like that kind of insultation either. Take the point instead.

The point is that we do not break stuff. And if we do, we fix ourselves or revert if fixing is infeasible. That's the point.

Exactly. Unfortunately that responsibility for the ecosystem as a whole is apparently completely unknown to the systemd-developers. -- Stefan Seyfried "If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

Part of that responsibility for breakage also lies within openSUSE, this is configurable and could easily be changed back to the default setting acpid had. The only advantage of the change in defaults is that now laptops without a desktop environment installed will suspend/hibenate if you press the corresponding keys/use the lidswitch. On the other hand desktop environments (including GNOME) in openSUSE which previously handled this and continue to handle this currently have to be patched because the necessary changes are not upstream or in a release yet.

Would it then be sensible to make it the default only if there's no desktop environment installed? A package that installs the configuration and is obsoleted by desktop environments should do that (after a whole 2ms of consideration, so take with a grain of salt). Just my 1¢ (not enough for 2) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org