Package Details: xscreensaver-arch-logo 5.43-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only)
Package Base: xscreensaver-arch-logo
Description: Screen saver and locker for the X Window System with Arch Linux branding
Upstream URL:
Licenses: BSD
Conflicts: xscreensaver
Provides: xscreensaver
Submitter: Harvie
Maintainer: graysky
Last Packager: graysky
Votes: 215
Popularity: 0.106815
First Submitted: 2009-05-19 16:57
Last Updated: 2019-07-11 16:31

Dependencies (9)

Required by (20)

Sources (6)

Pinned Comments

graysky commented on 2016-08-25 21:17

I believe without gdm as a makedep, the login screen switching option is not compiled in. I see that extra/xscreensaver also keeps this as a makedep. Feel free to remove prior to building.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... Next › Last »

jwhendy commented on 2015-07-22 14:58

Oh, and doh! Gotcha... I kept thinking upstream meant to jwz's xscreensaver. It probably *is* required for that functionality. I noticed that building without it will show the button, but clicking it just turns it to greyed out. Sorry for the confusion/miscommunication and I will submit a ticket.

graysky commented on 2015-07-21 08:41

Not upstream, just to our maintainers of the official package. Again, I thought it was in fact required as a makedep to compile in the change user dialog when locked.

jwhendy commented on 2015-07-21 01:59

@graysky: I understand, but what exactly would the ticket be? The complaint is that gdm isn't required as a makedepend, and it already isn't upstream, so I don't see what to request
- Upstream: if you happen to have it installed, xscreensaver will take that into account when running ./configure. If you don't, it won't. So... what's the upstream request?
- AUR package: you have to be aware that gdm isn't *really* a makedepend and manually remove it from the PKGBUILD vs. opting in by adding it.

It would seem that this package actually isn't matching the upstream behavior. I'm happy to submit a ticket, but this is why I checked the behavior myself. I'm glad I did as I would have felt foolish taking your word for the behavior, asking him to remove gdm as a build dependency, and then hearing back that he already doesn't.

Are we on the same page, or do you see things differently?

graysky commented on 2015-07-19 19:40

Bump to v5.33-1


graysky commented on 2015-07-19 19:38

As stated in the comment from 2014-11-16, please open a ticket against the official package. I try to keep this package as close to the official as possible.

jwhendy commented on 2015-07-19 17:31

I disagree that this is the upstream behavior. I was going to email Jamie per your 2014-11-16 comment but figured I'd verify the actual package first. I started with no intltool and no gdm installed (bc already installed for cups, and libxpm installed for a bunch of stuff). First error from running `./configure`:

./configure: line 7151: intltool-update: command not found
checking for intltool-update... no
checking for intltool-merge... no
checking for intltool-extract... no
configure: error: The intltool scripts were not found. Please install intltool.

Install intltool, then re-run ./configure... no errors, and compiles just fine. Storing the output of ./configure with and without gdm installed results in some slight differences, which tells me configure is simply *checking* if you have gdm, not assuming or forcing you to opt-in, as this AUR package does.

So... I would disagree that this is how the upstream package behaves, as in it fails/forces installation for intltool (a "true" makedepend) but does not for gdm. Thus, I think gdm should be opt-in. Mention it to the user in the package build or elsewhere (like the typical "Optional dependency for xxx: yyy" message when installing via pacman), but do not automatically include it since there's no need for it.

The current behavior, as already noted is unfortunate as it doesn't leave gdm flagged as un-needed. I only stumbled on all of this by accident when seeing a *ton* of gnome-sh*t in my pacman log that I didn't recall ever installing. Traced it to gdm, which I traced here. I could have been more attentive... but I guess I don't really expect optional stuff to come along by default when I'm dealing with Arch, either.

graysky commented on 2014-11-22 08:45

Bump to v5.32-1


graysky commented on 2014-11-16 13:26

Please read the comments below since this has been discussed ad nauseam in the past.

Summary: my understanding is that gdm is required when building only to enable the 'new login' button on the lock screen. You don't need gdm installed if you want to use the package, just build. If that is not the case, please open a ticket against the official package. I try to keep this package as close to the official as possible.

Anonymous comment on 2014-11-16 12:21

Can you please remove gdm from the makedepends please? I can confirm what silverhammermba said: it works just fine without it. By the way, having gdm in both makedepends and optdepends can confuse some package managers: yaourt doesn't display it in as a dependence.

Seriously, this is pain. On each update I have to manually edit the PKGBUILD in order to remove this useless gdm dependence if I don't want it to install a shitload of gnome-specific software I absolutely do not want. Keeping gdm in the optional dependencies will make everyone happy.

graysky commented on 2014-11-16 09:59

Bump to v5.31-1