Some pam modules prompt without expecting the user to type
an answer back (e.g. "Please swipe finger"). We need to
emit prompted in this case too, so the the dialog will get shown.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
Currently, fingerprint authentication is always a secondary thing.
If a user wants to swipe their finger when the computer is asking
for a password, so be it.
This commit paves the way for making fingerprint auth optionally
be the main way to authenticate. Currently there's no way to enable
this, but in a future commit will honor
enable-password-authentication=false
in gsettings.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
Right now, the primary way a user logs in is with
a password. They can also swipe their finger, if their
fingerprint is enrolled, but it's expected the fingerprint
auth service won't ask questions the user has to respond to
by typing. As such, we ignore questions that comes from
anything but the main auth service: gdm-password.
In the future, if a user inserts a smartcard, we'll want
to treat the gdm-smartcard service as the main auth service,
and let any questions from it get to the user.
This commit tries to prepare for that eventuality by storing
the name of the default auth service away in a _defaultService variable
before verification has begun, and then later checking incoming
queries against that service instead of checking against
string 'gdm-password' directly.
Of course, right now, _defaultService is always gdm-password.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
This commit introduces a new BeginRequestType enum which gets
passed to the 'reset' signal to specify whether
a username should be provided to the begin() method and changes
the loginDialog to comply.
Currently, the signal only ever gets emitted with
AuthPrompt.BeginRequestType.PROVIDE_USERNAME
but that will change in the future when providing smartcard
support.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
We currently emit "failed" any time the UserVerifier is reset,
and user verification didn't succeed prior.
A more conceptually clear time to emit "failed" would be if
the UserVerifier is reset and user verification failed prior,
and to emit "failed" if the user cancels unlock.
This commit restructures things to do that. Aside from being
more conceptually clear, it also lays the groundwork for us
to be able to reset the unlock screen without failing.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
authPrompt.reset() currently only leaves the authPrompt in a
sane state if the user isn't verifying.
This commit makes sure to cancel verification if a reset happens
while verification is in process.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683437
If we don't have a connection at startup or we transition from
having a connection to not having a connection, we need to make
sure we hide the correct indicators.
_updateState has a lot of variables that sort of gunk up the
code and make it more unreadable than need be. Clean up the logic
a lot by moving those variables into the places that they actually
matter, renaming them to remove prefixes, and remove some conditions
that are always met.
Right now the code chooses to animate based on whether or not the
notification was "removed", which is quite a sketchy subject. For
now, add an additional case so that we don't animate when we transition
to the lock screen.
When the triangle rotates (when sub-menu is expanded), it seems as if
the triangle pivots from one corner even though rotation center is set
to Clutter.Gravity.CENTER. Hence the rotation center is set nearer to
the edge than to the corner ([0.3, 0.5] instead of [0.5, 0.5]) so that
it doesn't appear odd.
Also pivot_point is used instead of rotation_center_z_gravity as it is
deprecated.
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=703109
This will replace the indicator painted on the stage right now.
This unfortunately does not work for the recorder triggered by the
keybinding -- we'll simply replace the in-shell code with a keybinding
powered by gnome-settings-daemon.
The existing app menu was a kludge of legacy code that tried to manage
a bunch of state, and had a number of issues:
* It didn't properly manage visibility when combined with multiple
apps and the overview.
* It didn't properly manage reactivity when tabbing away from a busy
app to another app.
* It didn't properly disconnect signals when going from one app
to nothing.
and countless others. Rewrite it to use the new "sync" code pattern,
where we centralize all state management and do transitions from that,
rather than strange and quirky control flow.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705898
Make the lock dialog group reactive, to intercept any events
before they go to the actors below.
In the future, we may restructure our chrome to have a clear
layer system, but for now it fixes a security issue in the lock
screen (you can see the contents of the windows by dragging
if the screen was locked with the overview active)
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705840
There's only two uses of the parameter left, which can easily be added as a
separate line below. Since it's really a private interface meant for the
indicators, make it private as well so external users are less likely to
use it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705845
To align the arrows, we need to allocate panel buttons the full
height of the tray. Fix up all of the panel buttons to support this,
and align the arrows in the middle.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705845
Swap out the implementation of SystemIndicator with a dummy,
and build the aggregate menu. At the same time, remove the
poweroff and login screen menus, as those were fake aggregate
menus beforehand.
We lose some flexibility as we lose session-mode-based menu
layout, but as each component of the aggregate menu is supposed
to be "smart" in response to updating itself when session
state changes, I believe it's better than a declarative model.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705845
We can't silently replace the old behavior of separate status
icons into a new system. Replace SystemStatusButton with a new
SystemIndicator class which will allow for the flexibility we
need. For now, make it a subclass of Button so that it mostly
feels the same, but we'll soon be swapping it out with a dummy
implementation that the aggregate menu will use.
I think the code cleanup here is worth it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705845
