Sure thing.
Just to be clear, do you mean that instead of launching "i3lock .." I
substitute "strace -o/tmp/i3lock-log-$(date +%s) i3lock ..."?
Jeff Abrahamson
+33 6 24 40 01 57
+44 7920 594 255 <-- only if I'm in the UK
http://jeff.purple.com/
http://blog.purple.com/jeff/
On 17 April 2015 at 09:19, Michael Stapelberg <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
i3lock shouldn’t hang around. Can you start stracing all your i3lock
instances automatically and provide the corresponding strace output of a
hung instance in a bugreport?
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Jeff Abrahamson <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have a maintenance function that ought not bother spinning the CPU if
the screen is locked. It checks this thus:
if pidof i3lock >/dev/null; then
...
This is i3-specific, which is sad, but not a huge problem. What is a
problem is that i3lock sometimes hangs around even though I think it should
exit on unlock. And, indeed, most of the time it does exit on unlock.
Once in a while, I find I have one or even several i3lock processes hanging
around.
I either lock my screen explicitly
bindsym $mod+Control+L exec i3lock --dpms --inactivity-timeout 10
--color=220022
or else it's done by inactivity
xautolock -detectsleep \
-time 3 -locker "i3lock --dpms --color=220022 --inactivity-timeout 10
--nofork"
This question thus has two parts:
1. Am I doing something wrong that I sometimes have multiple i3lock
instances?
2. Is there a better way to detect screen lock than pidof i3lock?
Jeff Abrahamson
+33 6 24 40 01 57
+44 7920 594 255 <-- only if I'm in the UK
http://jeff.purple.com/
http://blog.purple.com/jeff/
--
Best regards,
Michael