when suspending during unlock attempt, screen is not locked on unsuspend

[Eric Druid]

Binary package hint: gnome-screensaver

When computer is suspended during unlock attempt, after hitting enter but before actually being unlocked, the system is not locked on wake up.

My system suspends when my battery level is critical. So when I woke my computer it suspended again after a few seconds later, I had however had time enough to enter my password and hit enter before it suspended. Next time I woke my computer the screen was unlocked.

The expected behavior would be to not unlock the screen if a suspend/hibernate was performed during the unlock procedure.

Apport seems erroneously to have detected that my window manager is gnome while it is actually xfce4 (xubuntu setup), also my locked screen says XScreenSaver 5.10, not gnome-screensaver. I am unsure if this is a bug in apport or if things are just strangely labeled.

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: gnome-screensaver 2.30.0-0ubuntu2
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.36-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686
Architecture: i386
Date: Tue Jun 22 02:39:52 2010
GnomeSessionIdleInhibited: Unknown
GnomeSessionInhibitors: Failed to acquire
InstallationMedia: Xubuntu 9.10 "Karmic Koala" - Release i386 (20091028.3)
SourcePackage: gnome-screensaver
Symptom: security
Title: Screen locking issue
WindowManager: gnome-wm

[Tormod Volden (tormodvolden)]

For the apport issue, how did you run apport?

[Eric Druid (eric-druid+ubuntu)]

I ran apport on the command line:
% apport-bug
and then answered questions:
* Security related problem
* Other screen locking issue

I just recreated thees steps just now with the same result.

[Tormod Volden (tormodvolden)]

Thanks. Would you be so kind as to file a bug on apport also please :)

I think the xscreensaver should have locked it again a second time when suspending. But I see there is a potential glitch if it is in the process of unlocking when the computer suspends. If you are able to reproduce, can you please check if xscreensaver is still running afterwards?

[Charlie Kravetz (cjkgeek)]

When you installed xscreensaver, did you remove gnome-screensaver? It is possible to have both screensavers installed at the same time.

[Eric Druid (eric-druid+ubuntu)]

Tormod: Reproducing this bug is a bit tricky since it involves that xfce4-power-manager suspends the system due to low battery at precisely the right time.

Charlie: I did not remove gnome-screensaver from my system when I installed xscreensaver. I doubt that the fact that gnome-screensaver is installed in the system is relevant to this bug, it is more relevant to my bugreport on apport*.

* https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/602050

[Eric Druid (eric-druid+ubuntu)]

I have now reproduced this bug in a new install of xubuntu.

[Charlie Kravetz (cjkgeek)]

Thanks for reporting this bug and any supporting documentation. Since this bug has enough information provided for a developer to begin work, I'm going to mark it as confirmed and let them handle it from here.

Thanks for confirming this is still an issue with a new installation.

Thanks for taking the time to make Ubuntu better!

[Ian Nicholson (imnichol)]

Could this be related to bug 830348? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-2d/+bug/830348

[Charlie Kravetz (cjkgeek)]

@ Ian Nicholson:
It seems highly unlikely that a bug in xscreensaver is related to a bug in Unity2d, which did not exist until Ubuntu 11.10. The original bug report for this was filed using Xubuntu 10.04. Since Xubuntu does not use Unity at all, these are most likely unrelated bugs.

---
Ubuntu Bug Squad volunteer http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad

[Jarno Suni (jarnos)]

Xubuntu 10.04 is no longer supported. Can you reproduce the bug in newer supported Xubuntu? Which? You could install newer screensaver from PPA
https://launchpad.net/~hda-me/+archive/ubuntu/xscreensaver

Xfce calls xflock4 before suspending, if set to lock in preferences. You may want to disable the setting and call 'sh -c 'xflock4 && xfce4-session-logout -s' instead. Does it make difference?