Trying out the new Gnome 3.0 I am also using gdm and gnome-screensaver. Logging in using my fingerprint reader works fine. However unlocking the screensaver does not work. When I choose to switch user and then select myself I can unlock fine. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Lock the screen 2. Try to unlock using fingerprint Actual Results: Unlock window disappears but the screen remains locked. (This is not due to a fingerprint mismatch since in this case it will asks again to present your finger.) Expected Results: The screen should be unlocked.
Created attachment 269499 [details] output of emerge --info
Removing the .fprint .gnome* .gconf* etc (.local/ related to gnome). Seemed to have solved the issue. I can now unlock as expected.
Unlocking from gnome-screensaver seems to be broken. I again suffer from the previously described issue. However I noticed that this also occurs when unlocking using a password (fingerprint timed out, activating the password field).
*** Bug 364627 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Bug 364627 indeed seems to be very similar (even the fingerprint reader is the same). It somehow has to do with the (interaction with the) fprintd pam module because since I unmerged all fprint related packages the screensaver behaved as expected (except for the loss of fingerprint functionality).
Yes, if I remove the fprintd entry of system-auth file, the screensaver works as expected (with password).
Still valid with gnome3 from main tree?
I'll give it a try again, and report the results.
The gnome-screensaver from the main tree does not seem to support fprint, only password unlock, which does not cause any trouble. It would be nice to have proper screen unlock using fingerprint though.
(In reply to comment #9) > The gnome-screensaver from the main tree does not seem to support fprint, only > password unlock, which does not cause any trouble. > > It would be nice to have proper screen unlock using fingerprint though. We are not applying any patch or configure option to drop that fprint support, I guess that original problem is solved then and, regarding fprint support, this should be reported directly to upstream (if not reported yet)
