Subject: Re: wharf's maxswallow behavior

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1999 07:01:33 +0200

On Sun, Jul 25, 1999 at 08:34:54PM -0400, Ben Winslow wrote:
> Here is a patch to fix the Wharf's MaxSwallow behavior-- currently, it
> forces a MaxSwallow'd apps window to 55x57.  This patch uses
> XGetGeometry to change the size to match the running app, which fixes
> problems swallowing many AfterStep/Window Maker Wharf/Dock apps.  The
> patch is against 2.3.3, although the FvwmWharf module hasn't changed
> since then, so it should still work fine.

I have applied your patch. Thanks.

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: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 01:54:40 +0300 (IDT)

On Sun, 1 Aug 1999, Dominik Vogt wrote:

> > forces a MaxSwallow'd apps window to 55x57.This patch uses
> > XGetGeometry to change the size to match the runningapp, which fixes
> > problems swallowing many AfterStep/Window Maker Wharf/Dock apps.The

Then the option must be named NonResizeSwallow or similar, not MaxSwallow.
I'd prefer to leave MaxSwallow as is (maybe 55x57 changed to 64x64 or 
60x60) and to add a new option, but I can't judge (I don't use FvwmWharf).

Also, I am not sure what to do with applications larger than 64x64,
they will occupy the surrounding buttons with this patch applied. I will
add a limit to 64x64, or is there a better solution?

Regards,
Mikhael.