gnome-screensaver "hangs" on Open SUSE 10.0 with Gnome
I've 'repurposed' this direct HTML e-mail because it belongs on the list, Michael, and you may get more/better answers from the community. I haven't had to visit this issue in a long time so the details aren't fresh in my mind. Your original e-mail, sans HTML (which is a no-no here!):
Carl,
I installed Open SUSE 10.0 this week with the Gnome desktop (and no other).
I seem to be having a similar problem when locking the display to the one described below. gnome-screensaver-dialog runs. Mouse movement is registered on the display. However, key presses and mouse clicks are not registered.
I ssh to the computer from another computer to kill gnome-screensaver and am able to continue working.
All patches from SUSEWatch are installed.
Is there a workaround for this problem - other than installing the KDE desktop?
Thanks, Michael
<snipped excerpt of old thread> Hi Michael, Thanks for writing, but please don't send HTML encoded e-mail to me or to the list. Also, please send these kinds of inquiries to the list instead of to me, personally. I seem to remember a specific problem at that time with gnome-screensaver, but it was fixed fairly rapidly. And I think my conflict was actually the X *and* Gnome screen-savers contending to control the same resources to perform the same or similar functions. They were both enabled and configured to a default setting at installation, which is of course redundant. (This was 10.0 RC1 or RC2, wasn't it?) I can't remember which I disabled in Gnome CC, but disabling one and configuring the other solved my problem. Others on the list may have clearer recollections and better, more current suggestions. regards, - Carl
Carl Hartung wrote:
I installed Open SUSE 10.0 this week with the Gnome desktop (and no other).
I seem to be having a similar problem when locking the display to the one described below. gnome-screensaver-dialog runs. Mouse movement is registered on the display. However, key presses and mouse clicks are not registered.
I ssh to the computer from another computer to kill gnome-screensaver and am able to continue working.
It's related to X and most likely use an ATI card/chipset. It has happens to me on a few boxes and all of them had the ATI chipset and there are problems with X and ATI. 1. In yast UNinstall the gnome-screensaver. 2. In yast install XScreenSaver and it will work properly. -- Thanks http://www.911networks.com When the network has to work Cisco/Microsoft
On Monday 09 January 2006 10:52, Syv Ritch wrote:
Carl Hartung wrote:
I installed Open SUSE 10.0 this week with the Gnome desktop (and no <snip>
Hi Syv, Thank you for your response. Would you please try to pay closer attention to your quoting? I went to a great deal of trouble organizing the original post to clearly demark the original sender's question (quoted by me at the beginning) from my typed response below it. Nonetheless, you have still managed to inadvertently attribute the original question to me, whereas I actually responded by suggesting a solution comparable to your's, as follows:
I can't remember which I disabled in Gnome CC, but disabling one and configuring the other solved my problem. Others on the list may have clearer recollections and better, more current suggestions.
Thank you for contributing your time and knowledge. I know it's voluntary. I'm just pointing out that it can be construed as rude (inattentive) and bad form (lazy) to send posts to the list that, among other things (read the FAQ) quote people inaccurately. Of course, I am specifically *not* accusing you of any such attributes, just alerting you to the need for more care in this area. regards, - Carl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-01-09 at 11:42 -0500, Carl Hartung wrote:
Nonetheless, you have still managed to inadvertently attribute the original question to me,
I'm sorry to intrude, but, although I knew which text was not yours, I had problems to know whom it was from, because you forgot to precede it with a line like "On date... Michael wrote", which then Syv could have maintained when replying. About the OP problem, I have sometimes observed a related problem in 9.3, when the screen saver fails to fully return control when awakening, and has to be killed. It might be related to the particular screensaver it runs each time, as I have set it to "random". - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFDwwyLtTMYHG2NR9URAqImAJ9VXzwXSHQSt3BUpMBxhSjzadxhOgCaA7Hh uN8RKqBPPR/HxjQH3X2d4vU= =jqyq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Monday 09 January 2006 20:23, Carlos E. R. wrote: <snip>
I'm sorry to intrude, but, although I knew which text was not yours, I had problems to know whom it was from, because you forgot to precede it with a line like "On date... Michael wrote", which then Syv could have maintained when replying.
Hi Carlos, You should know I wouldn't mind you sharing your thoughts, since I am not shy about sharing mine. ;-) I must admit, however, that your reaction makes no sense to me. :-/ I know you are very, very smart and can do better, so let's step through the logic: If you know which text is *not* mine, it follows that you automatically know the text that *is*. Since I occupied the "From" field and the SLE address is in "To", you are left to conclude that the OP *must* occupy the "CC" field, no? Simple. And I am not yet ready to concede that my opening paragraph was somehow *less informative* than a 'normal' quote preamble, since I clearly provided full context in my explanation and I even addressed the OP in it, Michael, by name. Have I missed something? (Wouldn't be the first time!) regards, - Carl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-01-09 at 23:14 -0500, Carl Hartung wrote:
If you know which text is *not* mine, it follows that you automatically know the text that *is*. Since I occupied the "From" field and the SLE address is in "To", you are left to conclude that the OP *must* occupy the "CC" field, no? Simple.
And I am not yet ready to concede that my opening paragraph was somehow *less informative* than a 'normal' quote preamble, since I clearly provided full context in my explanation and I even addressed the OP in it, Michael, by name.
Have I missed something? (Wouldn't be the first time!)
Sort off :-) Ok, I can determine who the OP of the quoted material is, by deduction. I did, in fact. What I meant is that you might have quoted it like this: *-*-*-* {NAMe} said on {DATE}:
blah, bla, bla...
*-*-*-* Then, when answering, we only need to clip and leave it like: *-*-*-* Carl wrote:
{NAMe} said on {DATE}:
blah, bla, bla...
*-*-*-* And then, there would have been no problem ;-) - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFDw5hftTMYHG2NR9URAlm/AKCQcFqCk9nlVqdPTSP0hgl0ZYx6kwCeMO7V yg51K911/w6Dmf2JkxWSJVY= =9/pm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tuesday 10 January 2006 06:19, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Ok, I can determine who the OP of the quoted material is, by deduction. I did, in fact. What I meant is that you might have quoted it like this:
Carlos, Life is too short to drag these sorts of exchanges out indefinitely for no good purpose. I'd like to close this thread out with the following observations: The standard quote preamble, as you've suggested, is autonomous and devoid of any context. That fact is precisely what prompted me to write an explanatory opening paragraph. In that paragraph, I directly addressed the OP *by name.* If his name was overlooked, his identity could still be /easily/ deduced from the "CC" field. There can be only one conclusion: I did not impede anyone's ability to attribute his or her quotes accurately. The only "problem" was a very minor oversight... a simple misquote. And I was very polite when pointing it out. But, still, the responsibility to quote people accurately rests with the person clicking "Send." Now, let's call a truce and get back to the real purpose of this list. regards, - Carl
participants (3)
-
Carl Hartung -
Carlos E. R. -
Syv Ritch