AuthPrompt is the set of actors that contain the user avatar,
the username, and the password entry. With the removal of the
screen shield, the unlock dialog (be it UnlockDialog or the
LoginDialog) is always created, and in the case of UnlockDialog,
so is the auth prompt.
This is problematic, though, since for passwordless accounts,
the simple act of creating AuthPrompt authenticates the user,
and lifts the lock screen.
Create the AuthPrompt on demand in UnlockDialog.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
As per the latest lock screen mockups, critical notifications must have
a more prominent, solid color.
Add a .critical style class to critical notification bubbles, and make
them darker.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Now that the screen shield is gone (at least, as it used to
be), the corresponding session mode is not necessary anymore
as well.
Remove the 'lock-screen' session mode, and the corresponding
CSS.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Pretty much what the commit title says.
This gives the lock shield actor another role: instead of
being the interactive screen shield, make it the invisible
actor that prevents interacting with windows while the
unlock dialog is sliding down.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Activating a dialog is slightly different from opening it; the
former is about showing the user authentication widgetry, while
the latter is about creating it and pre-allocating the necessary
resources.
Activate the screen shield dialog when necessary.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
The 'onPrimary' argument was being passed to dialog.open(). Turns out,
neither UnlockDialog nor LoginDialog use this parameter.
Remove the unnecessary 'onPrimary' parameter, and cleanup the related
code.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
The use of the core idle monitor means that focus change events
are also delayed by keyboard interaction. Since the magnifier is
already in the business of pointer tracking, it's easy enough to
fire the pointer rest timeout from here, so focus changes are
accumulated and delayed.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/984
We may get several a11y events setting the caret on the same
coordinates it previously was. Make focus tracking ignore those,
as we're jumping to the same coordinates again during eg. mouse
operation.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/984
If the crosshair is clipped so it doesn't cover the pointer cursor,
the clip rectangle is skewed towards the bottom/right. This was
made so to accomodate the default pointer, but the unevenness stays
on other pointer cursors, and it makes the crosshair look odd on
short crosshair length.
Make all lines clip to an even distance from the center instead.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/984
It is somewhat unexpected that crosshair color and pointer cursor colors
remain the same across changes in color inversion settings, and may lead
to contrast issues. Apply the effect on the common container, so it
applies to these all.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/984
If the icon proper has opacity of zero then that's probably because a
clone of it is animating. So avoid animating the source actor too.
And if there's any other reason for the opacity being zero, still don't
animate it because we can't see it :)
Closes: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/2167
So as to guarantee the unmapped state sticks and doesn't get toggled
back to mapped before we return.
Being in a mapped state when `FolderIcon.vfunc_unmap()` returned was
causing an assertion failure in `clutter_actor_set_mapped` and crashed
the shell.
Closes: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/2170
The portal helper is rather sensitive because potentially-hostile Wi-Fi
networks can decide to launch it whenever they want (by blocking the
user's connection to the nmcheck domain) and load whatever web content
they want into it. So having this unsandboxed is really extraordinarily
risky. Previously it was a risk we had to accept, because WebKit did not
have a web process sandbox, but now it does. So let's bubblewrap all the
things!
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/983
