Re: [hackers] [PATCH] [slock] Remove faulty example and add a section on security considerations

From: Markus Teich <>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 21:17:23 +0200

FRIGN wrote:
> The given example does not work and the usage is so obvious that an example
> probably is not necessary here anyway.


I don't think it is that obvious. Have a look at the discussion starting from
the slock-1.3 announcement on February 12th this year again. Since the example
does not work any more, changing it to `slock sudo s2ram` and adding a note
about the needed line in the sudo config so s2ram can be run without a password
would be better.

The other block looks good and is more simple and flexible than changing the xkb
config ourselves from slock.c.

Received on Wed Sep 28 2016 - 21:17:23 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Sep 28 2016 - 21:24:22 CEST