Subject: Weird deiconify behavior

From: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 17:05:36 -0500

I've observed this bit of strangeness for some time now, but it seemed
intermittent, and I didn't have a handle on the conditions that
triggered it. I think I have now.

	If I iconify a Motif app, then move the icon, then deiconify it, the
window is only partially drawn - usually just the first item in the
menubar. If I move the window a little, then it gets redrawn in its
entirety.

	This doesn't happen with some apps, but I can consistently make it
happen with any Motif app. Hmmm... just tried it with xv, and it does
the same thing. Do this on the initial screen, and when it deiconifies,
only a little fragment in the top left corner gets drawn.

	Well, ok, I just tried a variety of programs, and it happens with a lot
of them, not just Motif. Happens with xterm, doesn't with rxvt. Doesn't
happen with several KDE apps I tried. XForms apps just freak out and
silently die - but they're prone to that.

	Has anyone else observed this?

- Bob
--
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: Steve Robbins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 22:01:42 -0500 (EST)

Hi,

Just after hitting "SEND", I noticed something else.  After getting xterm
into the weird state, I can recover by: resizing the window, or flipping
to another screen and back.

Hopefully this will ring a bell with someone who is familiar with this bit
of code.

--
Steve Robbins                              <[email-masked]>

I'd probably be famous now, if I wasn't such a good waitress.

---

From: Steve Robbins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 21:58:12 -0500 (EST)

> of them, not just Motif. Happens with xterm

Yup, I can do it consistently with xterm, too.  In fact, it doesn't matter
HOW little I move the icon.  When I deiconify, the xterm not only fails to
refresh, but only the top-left corner of the text area does anything at
*all* anymore.  The area is maybe 15 pixels tall by 50 wide.  Not even a
"full reset" of xterm will convince it to use the rest of the window.

This is not a locker room, and that's a surfboard, not a yacht.

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 22:17:47 -0500

> "full reset" of xterm will convince it to use the rest of the window.

Hmm...15x50.  Sounds like the size of an icon.

Perhaps you should do a make clean.  I know I was still having
problems until I did one earlier today.

--
Dan Espen
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854                     Phone: (732) 699-5570
--
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: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 00:57:29 -0500

> problems until I did one earlier today.

	Nope, that's not it. I don't build in my CVS tree. After I do an
update, I copy the tree to a test directory where I build it; so I
always do a clean "from scratch" build following each update.

	This problem's been around for some time. I just didn't hit it very
often, and it was only today that I noticed what I'd done to trigger it.

- Bob

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:22:15 -0500

On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 10:01:42PM -0500, Steve Robbins wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Just after hitting "SEND", I noticed something else.  After getting
> xterm into the weird state, I can recover by: resizing the window, or
> flipping to another screen and back.

Actually if you just move the window, at least with xterms it works.  I
have actually noticed this for about two weeks but the only thing I have
icons for is a few xterms and my mailer (rxvt).  Now rxvt doesn't do it,
but the xterms I have if, Dominik remembers, active icons.  Recentlly
I noticed if I move the active icon it shrinks to a bogus size, if i
deocinify I get about a half height for the window text, move the window
all the text comes back, and then iconify and my icon is the right size
again.

Hope this description might jog some more peoples memories.

Brad

>
> Hopefully this will ring a bell with someone who is familiar with this
> bit of code.
>
>
> > I've observed this bit of strangeness for some time now, but it
> > seemed intermittent, and I didn't have a handle on the conditions
> > that triggered it. I think I have now.
> >
> >     If I iconify a Motif app, then move the icon, then deiconify it,
> > the window is only partially drawn - usually just the first item in
> > the menubar. If I move the window a little, then it gets redrawn in
> > its entirety.
>

-- 
--- There are two kinds of knowledge, you either know the answer or
			you know where to find it
		      -Kane, Johnson, and anonymous
--
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: Steve Robbins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:17:22 -0500 (EST)

> always do a clean "from scratch" build following each update.

Note that you don't need to build in the source tree, so you don't need to
do any copying.  From the top of your cvs repository:

	rm -rf build
	cd build
	../configure [opts]
	make

I'm a member of the Elvis Death Cult.

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 14:32:32 +0100

On Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 08:22:15AM -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
> but the xterms I have if, Dominik remembers, active icons.

> Recentlly I noticed if I move the active icon it shrinks to a bogus size,

#$^%$@! How could this come up again? Does it still work with 2.2?
If not, can you find out the last beta that worked?
Could any of the recent changes in events.c(HandleConfigureRequest) has
caused this?

  1999-03-05  Matthias Clasen  <[email-masked]>
         * fvwm/events.c (HandleConfigureRequest): use BroadcastRestack.

  1999-03-02  Matthias Clasen  <[email-masked]>
          * fvwm/events.c (HandleConfigureRequest): allow clients
          to resize themself if shaded, but not if maximized.

  1999-01-09  Bob Woodside  <[email-masked]>
          * fvwm/events.c (HandleConfigureRequest): added resynchronization of
          * the stacking order ring when an app requests a change in its window's
          * place in the Great Chain of Being.

The second one seems to be a good candidate.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

-- 
Dominik Vogt, Hewlett-Packard GmbH, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/14-4596, fax: 07031/14-3883, [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: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:48:53 -0500

On Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 02:32:32PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:

> #$^%$@! How could this come up again? Does it still work with 2.2?  If
> not, can you find out the last beta that worked?  Could any of the
> recent changes in events.c(HandleConfigureRequest) has caused this?
>
>   1999-03-05 Matthias Clasen <[email-masked]> *
>   fvwm/events.c (HandleConfigureRequest): use BroadcastRestack.
>
>   1999-03-02 Matthias Clasen <[email-masked]> *
>   fvwm/events.c (HandleConfigureRequest): allow clients to resize
>   themself if shaded, but not if maximized.
>
>   1999-01-09 Bob Woodside <[email-masked]> * fvwm/events.c
>   (HandleConfigureRequest): added resynchronization of * the stacking
>   order ring when an app requests a change in its window's * place in
>   the Great Chain of Being.
>

Well it definettly still worked in the 2.2 release, I unfortunatelly
don't have any old 2.3 executables lying around to test against.
Begining of March deffinetlly sounds like the right time frame for this
breakage.  It's possible that all three of those commits could have
cause a problem, since they all involved HandleConfiureReuest.  I'll try
throwing some prints in that function and see what I can come up with.

Brad

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:08:13 +0100

> throwing some prints in that function and see what I can come up with.

I can remember quite well what we had to do to get this running.
When I'm back at home I'll ediff the 2.2 and 2.3 files. 

Bye

Dominik ^_^