Triangles should be flipped in RTL. This is the easiest way to do it that
doesn't rely on modifying the rotating logic, though it is a bit hacky since
the ClutterActor "scale-x" property technically considers the lower bound
to be 0. It works, though.
GrabHelpers use a 'captured-event' to steal events and emulate
modality or grab-like semantics. There can be issues when you try to
use multiple GrabHelpers stacked on each other. As Clutter follows
the DOM-like semantics of "first come, first serve", when a second
GrabHelper connects to 'captured-event', its callback will only be
processed *after* the first GrabHelper's callback is called.
This breaks the expectation of narrowing modality where new modals
take priority over the old ones.
Solving this globally in a cleaner manner would require a rewrite of
pushModal/GrabHelper. As a stopgap fix for now, use one shared
'captured-event' handler between all GrabHelper instances, and
delegate to the individual GrabHelpers.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=699272
This commit detects when a user inserts a smartcard,
and then initiates user verification using the gdm-smartcard
PAM service.
Likewise, if a user removes their smartcard, password verification
(or the user list depending on auth mode and configuration) are initiated
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
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