After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 588876 - [patch] [power-manager] Port to SessionManager service
[patch] [power-manager] Port to SessionManager service
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 596573
Product: rhythmbox
Classification: Other
Component: Plugins (other)
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: RhythmBox Maintainers
RhythmBox Maintainers
: 596084 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Reported: 2009-07-17 13:42 UTC by Stéphane Démurget
Modified: 2009-10-05 07:39 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

The actual patch (4.80 KB, patch)
2009-07-17 13:49 UTC, Stéphane Démurget
none Details | Review
Simplified version (4.67 KB, patch)
2009-07-17 17:20 UTC, Stéphane Démurget
none Details | Review

Description Stéphane Démurget 2009-07-17 13:42:07 UTC
Please describe the problem:
I'm going to attach a patch to port the power manager plugin to the gnome-session dbus service for inhibiting suspend/hibernation.

Steps to reproduce:

Actual results:

Expected results:

Does this happen every time?

Other information:
Comment 1 Stéphane Démurget 2009-07-17 13:49:18 UTC
Created attachment 138589 [details] [review]
The actual patch

I've if/def'ed using GDK_WINDOWING_X11 to get the shell window xid. Maybe this is too complex and should not be special cased, since I imagine the session manager service will not be available on an other backend?
Comment 2 Bastien Nocera 2009-07-17 14:04:31 UTC
Just leave out the GDK_WINDOWING_X11, the plugin shouldn't be built on other platforms.
Comment 3 Stéphane Démurget 2009-07-17 17:20:31 UTC
Created attachment 138622 [details] [review]
Simplified version
Comment 4 Jonathan Matthew 2009-07-21 12:22:13 UTC
Aside from a few spelling mistakes:

+		rb_debug ("Was going to inhibite, but we already did it");
+		rb_debug ("Was going to uninhibite, but we haven't inhibited yet");

the main concern I have here is whether 'suspend' is really what we should be inhibiting here.  We don't want to stop the user suspending the machine, we only want to stop the machine from suspending itself due to being idle.  

Inhibiting 'idle' appears to stop the screensaver as well as g-p-m's idle behaviour.  Maybe there isn't a way to do what I think we want.
Comment 5 Jonathan Matthew 2009-09-26 04:34:10 UTC
*** Bug 596084 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Jonathan Matthew 2009-10-05 07:39:21 UTC
Looks like inhibiting idle is (more or less) what we want, and the patch on bug 596573 does it, so we'll use that one.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 596573 ***