2024/06/23

2024-06-23 00:23:05 +0200wlhn(~wlhn@dl46fx8hbfttwvhb-h1ly-3.rev.dnainternet.fi)
2024-06-23 01:23:41 +0200tremon(~tremon@83.80.159.219) (Quit: getting boxed in)
2024-06-23 01:35:15 +0200wlhn_(~wlhn@dl46fx8bgm9q8wl8cy4qy-3.rev.dnainternet.fi)
2024-06-23 01:38:29 +0200wlhn(~wlhn@dl46fx8hbfttwvhb-h1ly-3.rev.dnainternet.fi) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2024-06-23 02:05:07 +0200zawaken-(~zawaken@user/zawaken)
2024-06-23 02:06:28 +0200zawaken(~zawaken@user/zawaken) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
2024-06-23 02:49:48 +0200wlhn_(~wlhn@dl46fx8bgm9q8wl8cy4qy-3.rev.dnainternet.fi) (Quit: Leaving)
2024-06-23 04:50:21 +0200 <haskellbridge> <iqubic (she/her)> You know what's annoying? Even though I have "M-s" bound to "unGrab >> spawn "flameshot --gui"" I can still accidentally press other xmonad keybindings and then flameshot claims it's lost focus and I can't use it anymore.
2024-06-23 04:53:14 +0200td_(~td@i5387090B.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2024-06-23 04:54:55 +0200td_(~td@i53870927.versanet.de)
2024-06-23 04:55:20 +0200 <geekosaur> yes, that's the problem with using passive key grabs for commands. but there are other problems with not doing so
2024-06-23 04:56:20 +0200 <geekosaur> ideally flameshot would do an active keyboard grab and then none of the passive grabs would work
2024-06-23 04:57:23 +0200 <haskellbridge> <iqubic (she/her)> It doesn't.
2024-06-23 04:58:08 +0200 <haskellbridge> <iqubic (she/her)> My screenlocker (i3lock-color) on the other hand, does do an active keyboard grab, so I can ask XMonad to unGrab and it just works.
2024-06-23 04:58:55 +0200 <geekosaur> yes, a screen locker that doesn't is a security hole
2024-06-23 04:59:13 +0200 <geekosaur> (slock used to have a failure mode that would lead to that)
2024-06-23 05:05:15 +0200 <haskellbridge> <iqubic (she/her)> It's called i3lock because it was originally made for i3.