Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "The Wayland Linux Screensaver Dilemma" video.

I feel like the whole point of having screensavers in the past was to keep the screen on for quick access but also save it from burn-in, and a lot of people had fun with that concept. I think the fun aspect can be preserved easily enough by just separating the locking component from the visual component and just whenever someone wants to see it, open that program. Personally, I'd rather play more FFT, but I suppose if someone were stoned the pipe maze could keep their attention for hours too.
8
Again I find myself wondering, why not manually turn it on? This seems to be most people's issue and setting up a shortcut key to run a program to spit unicorn vomit onto the screen seems to me to be the solution.
1
@centdemeern1 I don't guess I'll ever understand this point of view. Why are so many people against manually turning it on. One shortcut key breaks your train of thought? What kind of work do you do?
1
@centdemeern1 Yeah, and it makes no sense unless you've got some brain disease that prevents you from moving your hands while still thinking.
1
That actually sounds like a bug. If I leave a video playing the screenlocker won't lock. It could be that the video player you're using might not be communicating correctly to keep the screen unlocked while it's playing. What do you use? Is it something weird like omxplayer?
1
@Roxor128 I'd imagine that you should be able to disable one without uninstalling, but then again, the person who wrote each one could just be arrogant enough to think that a user would only install one and do weird things. Which would still be a bug, but of a different sort.
1
@dexterman6361 Can't you just set it to not timeout and then explicitly run a program that does the screensaver visuals?
1
@dexterman6361 I'd really like to know more of what happens with this wonkiness? When my screen turns off after locking, nothing else changes with my system. Is this a multi-monitor issue? For that matter, what distro do you use?
1
@manankataria Mine has a light that stays on whether it's on or off, it just changes colors, but my right speaker covers it, so it doesn't bug me. I've had these same speakers since I used Win98 and they still work perfectly while being fairly tiny and unobtrusive.
1
@nomadhgnis9425 I can certainly understand wanting all the features, because not everything will require newer hardware, but at the same time I kind of feel like the added complexity of a newer kernel might be asking too much of older hardware. Of course, on the other hand of that argument, the newer kernels will have security patches that can't just be willy-nilly applied to the older source. So it's kind of a quandary either way.
1
@nomadhgnis9425 Complexity isn't an excuse for me, it's an excuse for the hardware. The more processing that the computer has to do for the OS, the less it can do for you. Newer features lead to more CPU time for the OS. Surely you can understand that.
1
@nomadhgnis9425 That would be for features that are missing on specific architectures, not for removing features that don't depend on specific hardware and aren't separate modules anyway. I would suggest that if you don't have time to write a kernel from scratch then you probably don't have time to maintain a fork. So it's kind of a moot point either way.
1
@nomadhgnis9425 Well, if you want something that hardly ever changes and will definitely keep supporting older hardware, then that's a fine choice. Although I am wondering if there's anyone in the retro community that would consider forking the kernel to keep 386 support in. Maybe someone could convince Jeff Geerling to do it even if he doesn't play with older devices.
1
@nomadhgnis9425 That's a fair point, given the current situation. Who knows, those of us that value freedom in the future may all use retro and microcontroller based computers.
1
Okay, this is the last time I'm going to ask it, but can't you just run a visual program that spits out that same unicorn vomit when you want to see it? Manually starting the program with a shortcut is a perfectly acceptable and faster method of getting there.
1
@draconic5129 I guess it can be hard to impart tone in text, and I didn't mean I had asked you but rather others who seem to have the same desire regarding screensavers, and I'm certainly not pushing Wayland. In fact, if you want to keep using X for many more decades I couldn't possibly care less, but what possible reason other than looking at the visuals could anyone have with using a screensaver?
1
@CjqNslXUcM Yeah, I agree. Just needs someone with spare time to do it and get it out of the way.
1
Or, he doesn't owe you anything and if you want a feature that bad, implement it yourself. I can understand his frustration with users making demands and having no clue what it takes to actually implement them. Sure, it'd be nice if he did things you wanted him to do, and for free might I add, but he's not your sex doll to do with as you please.
1
@bluephreakr You do realize that the license is such that those things can be done and he can just be ignored, right? And if someone has already done it, then just use their fork.
1