Subject: Re: Some windows 'ignored'

From: Super-User <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:54:32 -0500

#define OVERRIDE_REDIRECT_IS_EVIL

Neil Bird <[email-masked]>  wondered:
>   The /only/ thing I can think of is that I've got some bizarre fvwm
> 'honour unsociable windows' flag set....

	Nope. The stacking order handling was changed in 2.2 to honor
sociopathic (override_redirect) windows by not raising FVWM-managed
windows above them. 

	This is a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't situation. The
change eliminates an often-reported problem with Motif menus getting
hidden because autoraise raised their main windows above them, and a few
other things as well. Unfortunately, it leaves you more exposed to the
unpleasantries of the, um, anal-retentive school of gui programming.

	We'll be including an option in the next release to allow you to revert
to the old stacking order handling, if that works better for you.
There's a patch on my Unofficial Patches page to do this, but it needs
updating for the 2.2 base (been trying to get around to this for a
couple of weeks!) - the mods to misc.c don't quite fit anymore.

	I'll try to get this updated soon. If you feel comfortable hacking the
sources and fitting patches in by hand, the patch can be found at

	http://www.pcnet.com/~proteus/Fvwm/NoAvoidUnmanaged.patch

I'll post a note when I've updated it.

- 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: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 00:06:15 -0500

Bob Woodside <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> There's a patch on my Unofficial Patches page [to allow you to revert
> to the old stacking order handling]...

	Ok, I finally got the patch updated to fit the 2.2 code base.
It can be fetched from 

        http://www.pcnet.com/~proteus/Fvwm/NoAvoid.html

- Bob

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 07:45:32 -0500

On Thu, Mar 18, 1999 at 12:06:15AM -0500, Bob Woodside wrote:

> > There's a patch on my Unofficial Patches page [to allow you to
> > revert to the old stacking order handling]...
>

Bob, Since we get so many requests about this could we put the patch
somewhere in the distribution for people so it all stays together, and
then make a FAQ entry (if there isn't one already) about it?

Brad

-- 
--- 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: Neil Bird <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 15:56:56 +0000

>         Ok, I finally got the patch updated to fit the 2.2 code base.

  Unfortunately, I'd need more (please sir!) - with this patch, yes, I can
bring windows above these popups, but I still can't move the smeggers.

  What'd be nice is a CompletelyIgnoreOverrideRedirect option. I guess
ol[v]wm must do this by default ...

  BTW - this patch broke my animated menus!

-- 
========================- http://www.rrds.co.uk/ -======================
 Neil Bird                   |   This is who we are     The time is near
                             |        There are 288 days remaining
 mailto:[email-masked] |                           [ T-81 days! ]
--
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: Neil Bird <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:10:38 +0000

>   BTW - this patch broke my animated menus!

  My mistake! I hadn't noticed before that menu animation only kicks in
/really/ close to the edge of the screen. I'd thought it kicked in
whenever the parent menu would be covered more than the offset defined.

  Sorry!

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:19:14 +0100

> whenever the parent menu would be covered more than the offset defined.

Now you confused me. What do you mean with 'really close to the edge of the
screen'? Of course animation should be started anywhere on the screen if
the menus overlap more than the offset defines (with a tolerance of a
few pixels). The position hints are taken into account too, though.

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: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:35:15 -0500

Neil Bird wrote:
>   Unfortunately, I'd need more (please sir!) - with this patch, yes,
> I can bring windows above these popups, but I still can't move the
> smeggers.
> 

	Actually, CompletelyIgnoreOverrideRedirect is what the old FVWM
handling does. This, however, includes not decorating them or attempting
to manage them or interfere with them in any way. While this is
impeccably correct, it's probably not what most people really want.

> I can't stop it [the GUI builder] *creating* the window like this, but
> I did add some code to set the flag to false afterwards. Is this not
> enough?

	Hmm...have you tried doing a Recapture? I have no idea whether this
would work, but give it a try. FVWM maintains a linked list of control
blocks representing the windows it manages. When a window is created (or
detected on startup), and it has override_redirect set, FVWM does not
create an entry for this window. Thereafter, it knows nothing of that
window's whereabouts, and simply ignores any events associated with it.

	During a Recapture, FVWM reparents all the top level windows back to
the root (and destroys its list); then it chases down the list of all
root's children looking for any it would like to adopt. At this point,
if you've turned off override_redirect, it seems to me that FVWM might
decide it's ok to decorate and manage the window.

	I don't have any apps like this to test the theory with, so I could be
overlooking something, but it's worth a try. Of course, I don't know how
your app will react to suddenly finding its window are being managed....

	(Just out of curiosity, can you tell us what the GUI builder is?)

> Just to clarify - is this option going 'properly' into fvwm?

	This was my intent. I still want to do something that will give the
same relief from anitisocial windows, but my informants tell me that the
patch as written for 2.2 won't really fit too well with FVWM's new layer
paradigm. We'll have to work on it a bit.

>   Is there any way of making it, instead, a Style opt., to apply to
> known dodgy apps./windows ("ForceManaged")?

	I think this is worth looking into, but I don't see it happening
quickly. There are a number of nettlesome issues to consider. For
example, styles are only applied to windows that FVWM is managing, so
how do we apply the ForceManaged style....

- Bob