Subject: Notification: incoming/619

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 07:22:24 -0500 (CDT)

FVWM Bug Tracking notification

new message incoming/619

Message summary for PR#619
	From: [email-masked]
	Subject: 'Features' with multi-head
	Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 07:22:23 -0500 (CDT)
	0 replies 	0 followups

====> ORIGINAL MESSAGE FOLLOWS <====

---

From: Michael Han <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 13:36:40 -0700

Hi, this is a reply to your bugreport filed about FVWM.

Previously from [email-masked]
>Full_Name: M. Tavasti
>Version: 2.2.4
>CVS_Date: 
>OS: Linux 2.2.14
>X_Server: Xfree-4.0
>Submission from: (NULL) (212.38.224.119)
>
>
>When running Dual-head display (:0.0 & :0.1) fvwm work's fine, but there is
>one 
>some things which are not optimally working:

When you say dual-head display, do you mean with or without Xinerama?

>- If I move my mouse from :0.0 to :0.1, and try to change virtual page with
>keyboard (ctrl-arrow), page changed in :0.0 unless I enter my mouse to some
>window in 
>:0.1 to get focus to it. I have sloppy focus. Looks like sloppy focus
>behaves 
>sloppy also in root-windows...
>
>- There is mess with FvwmCommand, since there is two fvwm's running
>
>- Is there good support to have different settings for :0.1, I don't want
>to have all
>init programs in both displays

fvwm's multihead support is known to have some trouble, since none of
the core developers has access to a multihead display, AFAIK. Though
if you have some time, we might be able to make some improvements.
Short-term, perhaps if you created two separate .fvwm2rc files, named
.fvwm2rc0:0 and .fvwm2rc0:1 and invoked fvwm from your session
manager/Xclients/whatever with exec fvwm2 -f .fvwm2rc$DISPLAY? To fix
your problem with FvwmCommand, one instance has to be invoked to use a
differently-named set of FIFOs via the -f option.

Fellow workers, I did a little research into Xinerama, but I'm having
a lot of trouble digging up information about how it works. Does
anyone have any resources? The xc/ source tree for X11R6.4 doesn't
appear to contain *any* documentation relating to Xinerama. Does
anyone even know if you have 0:0 & 0:1 with Xinerama? I should be able
to throw together a test for this in the future, since I have
XFree86-4 and a multi-head video card now.
-- 
[email-masked]                         http://www.best.com/~mikehan/
coffee achiever                              San Francisco, California
"I will not be a snickerpuss." - Lisa
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (M. Tavasti)
Date: 29 May 2000 09:16:43 +0300

> When you say dual-head display, do you mean with or without Xinerama?

Sorry, forgot. Without Xinerama, traditional approach. 

> if you have some time, we might be able to make some improvements.

Yeah, sure I can try to help you. Response-time won't be optimal, but
something like one new version tested / day wouldn't be too bad for
me. 

Everything works fine

> manager/Xclients/whatever with exec fvwm2 -f .fvwm2rc$DISPLAY? 

I'm using debian packaged fvwm, and they have bit different approch to
config files: system haves fvwmrc, which is calling user and local
administrator provided stub files. Idea is to give user possibility to
get atomatical updates to menus, etc. Debian haves all (at least most)
programs you install automatically having menu entry. 

I solved problem by using entries like this: (line splitted)

+ "I" Exec exec sh -c 'case  $DISPLAY in *:0.1 | *:1*) xsetroot -solid
\#2f5b5b ;; *) xv -rmode -root -quit -random
/usr/share/enlightenment/themes/BrushedMetal-Tigert/backgrounds/images/*
;; esac'

(You can see enlightenment haves something useful: backdrops :-)

> To fix your problem with FvwmCommand, one instance has to be invoked
> to use a differently-named set of FIFOs via the -f option.

Ok, thanks.

> anyone even know if you have 0:0 & 0:1 with Xinerama? 

With xinerama you have only :0.0, or that's what I think (tested
once). Fvwm behaves really strange way with it. Some ascii craphics:

---------------    ------------------
| Secondary   |    | Primary        | 
| 1280x960    |    | 1400x1050      | 
|             |    |                | 
|             |    |                | 
|             |    |                | 
|             |    | Z              | 
---------------    ------------------
 
Fvwm thinks my display is from upper left corner of secondary display
to place marked with Z! Probably something like this:

- It get's resolution, and get's primary displays size 1400x1050. So,
we have coordinates from 0,0 -> 1400,1050. And bottom right corner
happens to be on Primary display, because secondary is smaller. With
two equally-sized (in pixels) displays, display sitting on the right
would be un-usable....

Anyway, Xinerama is not usable for me, because both displays have to
be same depth, and with 2M mem secondary display must be 8 bit.

> I should be able to throw together a test for this in the future,
> since I have XFree86-4 and a multi-head video card now.

I might be wrong, but XFree-4.0 doesn't support multihead-video cards,
but it supports multiple normal pci/agp video cards. I have i740-agp and
ATI-rageII-pci cards, and it works. Not fine, in power-up I have to
change secondary card as primary, get boot prompt, go back to bios and
change primary back to be primary. That's only way I found to get both
cards properly initialized (= properly working).

And can't use more than 2M mem from my secondary card. :-(

I think you should get best results if you have two Matrox (Millenium
or whatever) cards installed to your system. Don't hesitate to ask me
if you are experimenting with it, and don't get it working. Do you
want to get my XF86Config? 

-- 
M. Tavasti /  [email-masked]  /   +358-40-5078254
 Poista sähköpostiosoitteesta molemmat x-kirjaimet
     Remove x-letters from my e-mail address
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Michael Han <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 13:58:09 -0700

Previously from M. Tavasti
>/usr/share/enlightenment/themes/BrushedMetal-Tigert/backgrounds/images/*

You could do this. Or perhaps you could do something like:

Read .fvwm2rc-head-$DISPLAY

and place head-specific commands there. Of course, I'm not sure that
Read will do variable substitutions... In any event, yes, calling out
to a shell will definitely do the trick.

>once). Fvwm behaves really strange way with it. Some ascii craphics:

That's very good to know.

Yes, when fvwm2 queries the display for the screen size, it isn't
aware that it can be asking about multiple rectangles. My guess is
that if you place Screen "Secondary" RightOf Primary, things would at
least be usable. But, yes, I suspect your problem is the result of the
{Height|Width}OfScreen() function returning the Primary screen's size,
but +0+0 being located on the Secondary Screen.

>want to get my XF86Config? 

I've got what I think would be a working config if it weren't for the
fact that my second display head is on the unusable second VGA-out of
my Matrox G400. Still, I guess I could always rip my old Millenium II
8MB out of my Linux box, or something. FVWM would, I think, profit
from better multi-head and/or Xinerama support.

Fellow workers, how much trouble is it going to cause for the screen
to be non-rectangular? I've got the bad feeling that the math involved
in a lot of places like CleverPlacement just got a lot harder.
-- 
[email-masked]                         http://www.best.com/~mikehan/
coffee achiever                              San Francisco, California
"I am not a number; I am a free man!" - Number Six
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 02:42:07 +0200

> > to use a differently-named set of FIFOs via the -f option.

I have fixed this.  You can now safely start one FvwmCommandS
daemons on each screen.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

--
Dominik Vogt, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 23:00:47 +0200

> > to use a differently-named set of FIFOs via the -f option.

I really don't understand why FvwmCommand does not use the
DISPLAY in the pipe names.  According to the code it should
do that.  The same happens if you start multiple X servers
and switch between them with Ctrl-Alt-Fn.  Both instances
of FvwmCommandS use the same pipes :-(  This should really
be handled by the module itself.  Any ideas why the code
in FvwmCommandS.c does not work?

> cards properly initialized (= properly working).

Hm, I'll have to try that.  Somewhere in the 4.0 documentation I
found a comment that they still have big trouble with multi head.
The reason was that the second video card isn't initialised.  They
mentioned that multi head usually works with two Matrox cards.  I
finally gave up trying.  Perhaps I can get multihead running with
that hint.  I don't know if a multi head video card will work.

> And can't use more than 2M mem from my secondary card. :-(

:-p

> or whatever) cards installed to your system.

Well, finding a store that still sells Matrox PCI cards is a
bit difficult... :-(

Bye

Dominik ^_^

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 02:48:35 +0200

On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 01:58:09PM -0700, Michael Han wrote:
> to be non-rectangular?

Lots.  Ouch!

> I've got the bad feeling that the math involved

You're an optimist.  I can't believe we can ever properly handle
this situation.  (Did you notice I'm a pessimist).

Bye

Dominik ^_^